Case 3312027/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Secretary of State for Business and Trade and Braunston Ltd (in liquidation) — 2025
- Case reference
- 3312027/2024
- Decision date
- 11 December 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Walker Appearances
- Venue
- Bury St Edmunds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal recorded that Mrs J A Braunston was an employee of the respondent at the relevant time. On that basis, the judgment stated that the claim would proceed.
The written judgment does not determine the listed substantive claims, does not award any remedy, and states that reasons were given orally at the hearing. No panel members are listed beyond Employment Judge Walker.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment only records that the claimant was an employee at the relevant time and that the claim will therefore proceed; it does not give a final outcome or remedy for this claim. | Other | — | — |
| Redundancy | The judgment only records that the claimant was an employee at the relevant time and that the claim will therefore proceed; it does not give a final outcome or remedy for this claim. | Other | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment only records that the claimant was an employee at the relevant time and that the claim will therefore proceed; it does not give a final outcome or remedy for this claim. | Other | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The judgment only records that the claimant was an employee at the relevant time and that the claim will therefore proceed; it does not give a final outcome or remedy for this claim. | Other | — | — |
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.