Case 3309561/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Dr Paul Wright, Friend For the v VDJ Health Ltd (T/a Bluebird Care, Felixstowe) (in Voluntary Liquidation) — 2023
- Case reference
- 3309561/2022
- Decision date
- 18 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Venue
- Bury St Edmunds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Dr Paul Wright, Friend For the
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge K J Palmer sat alone at Bury St Edmunds on 17 April 2023. The respondent did not attend and was not represented. The judgment records that Ms Sarah Godfrey succeeded in her unfair dismissal claim, with an award of £1,863 basic award and £21,500 compensatory award, making £23,363 on that claim.
The tribunal also recorded that the claimant succeeded in her claim for unlawful deductions of wages and made a declaration to that effect, awarding £38,500. The claim for unpaid holiday pay in lieu of accrued untaken holiday at termination also succeeded, with an award of £4,812.50.
A contractual claim succeeded in relation to the respondent's failure to enrol the claimant in a pension scheme, and the tribunal awarded £2,900.68. The grand total awarded was £69,576.18.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Claimant succeeded; award comprised £1,863 basic award and £21,500 compensatory award. | Upheld | — | £23,363 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal made a declaration that the unlawful deductions claim succeeded and awarded £38,500. | Upheld | — | £38,500 |
| Holiday pay | Claim for unpaid holiday pay in lieu of accrued untaken holiday at termination succeeded. | Upheld | — | £4,813 |
| Breach of contract | Contractual claim succeeded in respect of the respondent's failure to enrol the claimant in a pension scheme. | Upheld | — | £2,901 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £69,576
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £1,863
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £21,500
- compensatory remedy recorded
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.