Case 1802953/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms M Okoniewska v Lurgashall Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 1802953/2022
- Decision date
- 13 September 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge McAvoy Newns
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms M Okoniewska
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe hearing took place on 13 September 2022 at Leeds Employment Tribunal via CVP before Employment Judge McAvoy Newns. The Claimant did not attend, and the tribunal proceeded in her absence after considering Rules 2, 30A and 47 of Schedule 1 to the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013.
The tribunal rejected the Claimant's claim of direct sex discrimination under section 13 of the Equality Act 2010, finding that it was not well-founded. That claim was dismissed.
The tribunal upheld the Claimant's breach of contract claim under the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994/1623. It ordered the Respondent, Lurgashall Limited, to pay £580 gross, with the Claimant responsible for any income tax and/or national insurance contributions due on that sum.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex discrimination | The tribunal found the direct sex discrimination complaint under section 13 Equality Act 2010 was not well-founded and dismissed it. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Breach of contract | The breach of contract claim under the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994/1623 succeeded, and the Respondent was ordered to pay £580 gross. | Upheld | — | £580 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £580
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
3 references- section 13 Equality Act 2010
- Rules 2, 30A and 47 of Schedule 1 to the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
- Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994/1623
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.