Case 1600712/2019 · Employment Tribunal
In Person For the v Ms K. Reece (Employment Consultant) — 2019
- Case reference
- 1600712/2019
- Decision date
- 15 August 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Beard Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In Person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Beard, sitting at Carmarthen on 12 August 2019, found that Miss Sliwinska's claims for breach of contract, described as failure to pay notice pay, and unlawful deduction of wages, described as holiday pay, were well founded against Appliance Universe Limited. The judgment records that the claimant appeared in person and the respondent was represented by Ms K Reece, solicitor.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay the claimant compensation of £985.20 on the two claims. It also ordered the claimant to pay the respondent £200 in costs, with that sum to be set off against the compensation awarded. On the face of the judgment, the net effect after set-off is £785.20 payable to the claimant.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claim well founded. The compensation of £985.20 was awarded on the breach of contract and unlawful deduction claims together and was not split between them. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the holiday pay claim well founded. The compensation of £985.20 was awarded on the breach of contract and unlawful deduction claims together and was not split between them. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £785
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £985
- 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.