Case 3305316/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms R Azevd v Greggs plc — 2023
- Case reference
- 3305316/2022
- Decision date
- 10 February 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Hussain Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms R Azevd
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal recorded judgment following a hearing at Watford by CVP on 9 and 10 February 2023 before Employment Judge Hussain. The claimant appeared in person and the respondent was represented by counsel.
The judgment states that the claimant's unfair dismissal claim was not well founded. It also dismissed the breach of contract claim for notice pay and the unlawful deductions from wages claim relating to holiday pay.
No written reasons are included in the supplied judgment text. The judgment records that oral reasons were given at the hearing and that written reasons would only be provided if requested within the stated time limit.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states the unfair dismissal claim was not well founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment identifies this as breach of contract for notice pay and dismisses it. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The judgment describes this as unlawful deductions from wages for holiday pay and dismisses it; classified as holiday_pay because holiday pay is the specific subject matter. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.