Case 2415293/2020 · Employment Tribunal

Miss G Holland v Zion Care (St Albans) Limited — 2022

Case reference: 2415293/2020
Decision date: 22 December 2022
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Benson Representation

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Miss G Holland

Respondent

Zion Care (St Albans) Limited

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

At a hearing in Liverpool by CVP on 12 to 16 December 2022, Employment Judge Benson recorded that Miss G Holland succeeded in her claim that she had been automatically unfairly dismissed contrary to section 103A Employment Rights Act 1996. The written record states the result but does not set out the tribunal's full reasons, noting instead that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested.

The tribunal also held that Zion Care (St Albans) Limited dismissed the claimant in breach of contract because she was not given notice of dismissal. No monetary award is recorded in the written judgment, and the record does not split out any remedy by claim or state a total award.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Whistleblowing	The tribunal held that the claimant was automatically unfairly dismissed contrary to section 103A Employment Rights Act 1996.	Upheld	—	—
Breach of contract	The tribunal held that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract because she was not provided with notice of dismissal.	Upheld	—	—

Legal tests applied

1 reference

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.

Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.

How we got this data

Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.

Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.