Case 2301902/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Victoria Covalenco v Shifudo Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 2301902/2023
- Decision date
- 9 August 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Evans
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Victoria Covalenco
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Evans determined the case on the papers under Rule 21. The tribunal found that SHIFUDO LTD had made unauthorised deductions from Victoria Covalenco's wages and ordered it to pay £3,437.57.
The tribunal also found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice, and awarded damages of £5,000. In addition, it found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £855.04.
The judgment does not record any rejected claims or separate interest award. The total sum ordered was £9,292.61.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £3,437.57. | Upheld | — | £3,438 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered damages of £5,000. | Upheld | — | £5,000 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £855.04. | Upheld | — | £855 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £9,293
- across all upheld claims
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.