Mrs A Trosh-Burnett v Michael Wardle — 2019

Case reference: 2503533/2019
Decision date: 19 December 2019
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Johnson Date

Indexed: 21 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mrs A Trosh-Burnett

Respondent

Michael Wardle

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

This was a Rule 21 judgment in favour of Mrs A Trosh-Burnett against Michael Wardle. The tribunal found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered the respondent to pay damages of £295.56.

The tribunal also found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £443.34. In addition, it found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £226.60. The total of the ordered sums was £965.50.

Claims and outcomes

3 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Breach of contract	The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered damages of £295.56.	Upheld	—	£296
Redundancy	The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and entitled to a redundancy payment of £443.34.	Upheld	—	£443
Holiday pay	The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £226.60.	Upheld	—	£227

Remedy

Monetary award

Total award: £966; across all upheld claims

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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.