Case 3300278/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs H Vizard v Boardworks Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 3300278/2022
- Decision date
- 30 May 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Anstis
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs H Vizard
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment by Employment Judge Anstis on 30 May 2022. The tribunal recorded that Mrs H Vizard had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice, and ordered Boardworks Ltd to pay damages of £4,962.46. It also found that she was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £2,896.00.
The judgment further recorded that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement, and ordered payment of £606.54. A separate breach of contract finding was made in relation to unpaid pension contributions, with an order that the respondent pay £2,181.46. No separate findings of fact or legal analysis were set out in the extracted judgment beyond the stated orders.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice. | Upheld | — | £4,962 |
| Redundancy | The claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was awarded a redundancy payment. | Upheld | — | £2,896 |
| Holiday pay | The respondent failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £607 |
| Breach of contract | Breach of contract for unpaid pension contributions. | Upheld | — | £2,181 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £10,646
- 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.