Case 1403425/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss A Majewska v Bright Hospitality Operations Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 1403425/2020
- Decision date
- 30 June 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Livesey Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss A Majewska
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a CVP hearing on 22 June 2021 before Employment Judge Livesey, the tribunal made findings on the claimant's wages, holiday entitlement, notice, and written terms of employment. It ordered Bright Hospitality Operations Ltd to pay £2,960.00 for an unauthorised deduction from wages, £460.01 for unpaid holiday entitlement, and £625.50 as damages for breach of contract in respect of notice.
The tribunal also found that the claimant had not been provided with written terms and conditions of employment and awarded a further £1,305 under section 38 of the Employment Act 2002, described as four weeks' pay. The claimant's unfair dismissal complaint was dismissed upon withdrawal. The four monetary awards total £5,350.51, and the judgment does not record any separate interest or unfair dismissal compensation figures.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unauthorised deduction from wages; gross sum of £2,960.00 awarded. | Upheld | — | £2,960 |
| Holiday pay | Failure to pay holiday entitlement; sum of £460.01 awarded. | Upheld | — | £460 |
| Breach of contract | Breach of contract in respect of notice; damages of £625.50 awarded. | Upheld | — | £626 |
| Other | Award under s.38 Employment Act 2002 for failure to provide written terms and conditions of employment; four weeks' pay awarded. | Upheld | — | £1,305 |
| Unfair dismissal | The unfair dismissal complaint was dismissed upon withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,351
- 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.