Case 2602590/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs A Wadhams v Barry Dovey trading as Phoenix Accounting — 2019
- Case reference
- 2602590/2019
- Decision date
- 30 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Adkinson Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs A Wadhams
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningIn this Rule 21 judgment, Employment Judge Adkinson Date found that Mrs A Wadhams had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice. The tribunal ordered Barry Dovey trading as Phoenix Accounting to pay damages of £2,765.16 for that claim.
The tribunal also found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £2,765.16. It further found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £460.86 in respect of that sum.
The hearing listed for 21 February 2020 was cancelled. The judgment records no separate award breakdown beyond the three sums ordered and contains no discrimination findings or other legal tests.
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 awarded damages in that sum. | Upheld | — | £2,765 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and awarded a redundancy payment in that sum. | Upheld | — | £2,765 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement and ordered payment of that sum. | Upheld | — | £461 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,991
- across all upheld claims
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe 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.