Case 1600462/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss O Corgier v The Naked Vegan Ltd (In Creditors Voluntary Liquidation) — 2024
- Case reference
- 1600462/2023
- Decision date
- 27 March 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge C Sgarp Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss O Corgier
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the Wales Employment Tribunals on 6 March 2023. The Respondent did not present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge determined the claim under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
On the substance of the claim, the tribunal found that the Respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the Claimant's wages and ordered payment of £807.50 gross. It also found that the Claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded £403.75 gross in damages.
The tribunal further found that the Respondent had failed to pay the Claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £944.78 gross. The judgment records a total award of £2,156.03 gross, with the Claimant responsible for any tax and employee national insurance due.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Rule 21 judgment: the Respondent made unauthorised deductions from wages and was ordered to pay £807.50 gross. | Upheld | — | £808 |
| Breach of contract | The Claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and was awarded £403.75 gross damages. | Upheld | — | £404 |
| Holiday pay | The Respondent failed to pay the Claimant's holiday entitlement and was ordered to pay £944.78 gross. | Upheld | — | £945 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,156
- 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.