Case 2200602/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms. B Bozhikova v Alterations Boutique Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2200602/2022
- Decision date
- 21 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Joyce Representation
- Venue
- London Central
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms. B Bozhikova
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal upheld claims for unlawful deduction from wages, breach of contract, and payment in lieu of untaken annual leave. It found that Ms B Bozhikova worked for Alterations Boutique Ltd as a seamstress from 13 July 2021 to 5 October 2021, initially on £30,000 per annum and then on £35,000 per annum from 13 August 2021. The tribunal accepted that she worked 43.5 hours per week and that, while covering the Manchester outlet, she performed overtime and additional duties including responding to texts, phone lines, material requests, and deliveries.
On the events of 5 October 2021, the tribunal preferred the claimant's account of the telephone conversation with Mr Echeverria. It found that she did not resign; instead, the respondent dismissed her because she no longer wished to work in Manchester. The tribunal therefore found that the respondent failed to give the contractual one month notice and awarded £2,691.80 for notice pay.
On wages, the tribunal found that the claimant completed the overtime shown in her ledgers and that the respondent underpaid it. It accepted that 112 hours had been paid at £8.91 rather than £15.47 and calculated unpaid overtime at £4,430.04. For annual leave, the tribunal applied regulation 14 of the Working Time Regulations 1998, found that 6.5 days remained due on termination, and awarded £874.80. No bonus award was made because that issue was not pursued at the hearing.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found unpaid overtime for July to September 2021, including 112 hours paid at £8.91 instead of the correct £15.47 hourly rate. | Upheld | — | £4,430 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed on 5 October 2021 rather than resigning, and that the respondent breached the contractual one month notice clause. | Upheld | — | £2,692 |
| Working time regulations | The tribunal applied regulation 14 of the Working Time Regulations 1998 and found 6.5 days of accrued annual leave due on termination. | Upheld | — | £875 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £7,997
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Regulation 14 Working Time Regulations 1998
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.