Case 2301046/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Daisy Coo-Kasprzyk Simran Palah v Lee Kerr Trading as Porter & Co By CVP and 1 other — 2024
- Case reference
- 2301046/2023
- Decision date
- 25 January 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Martin Claimant
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Daisy Coo-Kasprzyk Simran Palah
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a reserved judgment of Employment Judge Martin dated 25 January 2024 in proceedings brought by Daisy Coo-Kasprzyk and Simran Palah against Lee Kerr trading as Porter & Co and KSW Law CIC. The judgment records that Daisy Coo-Kasprzyk attended in person, Simran Palah did not attend, and Lee Kerr appeared for the Respondent.
The judgment does not set out any substantive findings on the merits of the underlying claims. It states only that both Respondents had been dissolved and that, for that reason, the Claimants' claims were dismissed.
No liability findings, legal tests, or remedy awards are recorded in the judgment text. There is no monetary award and no apportionment of any compensation between claims.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The body of the judgment does not specify the legal label for the claim; this classification follows the gov.uk listing category. The Tribunal dismissed the claim because both Respondents had been dissolved. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The body of the judgment does not specify the legal label for the claim; this classification follows the gov.uk listing category. The Tribunal dismissed the claim because both Respondents had been dissolved. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.