Case 3300512/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs R Harfield v Toad Hall Nursery Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 3300512/2021
- Decision date
- 31 January 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gumbiti-Zimuto Appearances
- Venue
- Reading
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs R Harfield
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Reading on 13 January 2022 before Employment Judge Gumbiti-Zimuto. The claimant, Mrs R Harfield, appeared in person and was assisted by Mr R Jones. The respondent, Toad Hall Nursery Limited, was represented by Mr M Cameron, consultant.
The written judgment records that the respondent was ordered to pay the claimant £3,464.86 gross. That sum was broken down as notice pay of £3,022.88 gross, holiday pay of £32.34 gross, and furlough pay of £409.64 gross.
The judgment states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days of the sending of the written record. The extracted text therefore records the monetary outcome only and does not set out further written findings on liability.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The written judgment records an award of notice pay of £3,022.88 gross. The extracted text does not set out separate written reasons, so the breach-of-contract classification is inferred from the award head. | Upheld | — | £3,023 |
| Holiday pay | The written judgment records an award of holiday pay of £32.34 gross. The extracted text does not set out separate written reasons, so this classification is based on the award head used in the judgment. | Upheld | — | £32 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The written judgment records an award of furlough pay of £409.64 gross. The extracted text does not set out separate written reasons, so the unlawful deduction from wages classification is inferred from the award head. | Upheld | — | £410 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,465
- 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.