Case 1806616/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs M Tomczyk v Heritage Cashmere UK Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 1806616/2021
- Decision date
- 4 February 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Moxon Representation
- Venue
- Leeds via CVP
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs M Tomczyk
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs M Tomczyk attended and was represented at the hearing; Heritage Cashmere Limited did not attend and was not represented. The tribunal found that she had been dismissed by reason of redundancy and was therefore entitled to redundancy pay. It used a gross weekly wage of £356.28, recorded that she was aged 41 with 9 years of service on the effective date of termination, and applied a multiplier of 9.5 to reach a redundancy entitlement of £3,384.66.
The tribunal also found that the respondent was in breach of contract by wrongfully dismissing the claimant without notice when she was entitled to nine weeks' notice. It recorded gross damages for wrongful dismissal of £3,206.52, then gave credit for £408.81 paid by the respondent and £2,000 earned from alternative employment, producing a net figure of £797.71. The written judgment contains a sentence in paragraph 4 stating £356.28 as the sum owed, but the arithmetic shown and the final total award indicate that £797.71 was the amount payable for the breach of contract claim.
The claim for unpaid holiday pay was dismissed. The judgment ordered the respondent to pay the claimant a total of £4,182.37 on or before 19 February 2022, comprising the redundancy payment and the net breach of contract award.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to redundancy pay. It calculated the award using a gross weekly wage of £356.28, age 41, and 9 years' service, giving a multiplier of 9.5. | Upheld | — | £3,385 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the respondent was in breach of contract by dismissing the claimant without notice when she was entitled to nine weeks' notice. Paragraph 4 states £356.28, but the arithmetic shown below it gives £3,206.52 less credits of £408.81 and £2,000, leaving £797.71, which matches the total award. | Upheld | — | £798 |
| Holiday pay | The claim for unpaid holiday pay was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,182
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £798
- 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.