Case 1805094/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Gupta v Comforting Hands Recruitment Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 1805094/2023
- Decision date
- 24 January 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bright REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Gupta
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr A Gupta, brought a breach of contract complaint against Comforting Hands Recruitment Ltd. The case was heard at Leeds by CVP on 24 January 2024, with Mr Gupta appearing in person and the respondent not in attendance.
The tribunal held that the complaint of breach of contract in relation to notice pay and holiday pay was well-founded. It awarded the claimant £1,892.00 as damages for breach of contract.
The written judgment states that the figure was calculated using gross pay to reflect the likelihood that the claimant would have to pay tax on it as Post Employment Notice Pay. No other remedy components were recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the complaint of breach of contract in relation to notice pay and holiday pay to be well-founded. Damages were assessed at £1,892 gross, calculated to reflect the likelihood that the claimant would have to pay tax on it as Post Employment Notice Pay. | Upheld | — | £1,892 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,892
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £1,892
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.