Case 3325450/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Kozik, Solicitor. For the v Ms S Shah, Solicitor. COVID-19 Statement on behalf of Sir Ernest Ryder, Senior President of Tribunals. This was a remote hearing which had not been objected to by the parties. A face to face hearing was not held in view of the Coronavirus pandemic. — 2020
- Case reference
- 3325450/2019
- Decision date
- 27 August 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Laidler Appearances
- Venue
- Bury St Edmunds
Parties
2 namedKey findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a remote hearing held at Bury St Edmunds on 26 August 2020 before Employment Judge Laidler. The parties were represented by solicitors and the hearing proceeded without objection to the remote format in light of the Coronavirus pandemic.
The only substantive claim recorded in the judgment was a breach of contract claim brought by Ms M Berlik against The Queen Elizabeth Hospital King's Lynn NHS Foundation Trust. The tribunal recorded that the claim was dismissed on withdrawal. No liability findings on the merits are set out in the judgment.
The judgment records no award, no split of remedy, and no further substantive reasoning beyond the disposal of the claim by withdrawal.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment states that the claimant's breach of contract claim was dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.