Case 2304814/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss J Tuffey v Fusion Dining Company Limited (in voluntary liquidation) and 1 other — 2023
- Case reference
- 2304814/2022
- Decision date
- 24 May 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Leith Representation
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Miss J Tuffey
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Croydon by video on 24 May 2023 before Employment Judge Leith. The claimant, Miss J Tuffey, was represented by her brother. Neither respondent attended or was represented.
The tribunal recorded that the claimant's claims for statutory redundancy pay and breach of contract succeeded. It ordered the first respondent, Fusion Dining Company Limited (in voluntary liquidation), to pay a statutory redundancy payment of £1,142 and damages for breach of contract of £938.10, the latter subject to statutory deductions for income tax and national insurance.
The tribunal also dismissed the claims against the second respondent, Amelia Estates Limited. The judgment is short and does not set out detailed findings or legal reasoning beyond the outcome and the sums awarded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The tribunal held the claimant's claim for statutory redundancy pay succeeded. The first respondent was ordered to pay £1,142. The claims against the second respondent were dismissed. | Upheld | — | £1,142 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal held the claimant's breach of contract claim succeeded. The first respondent was ordered to pay £938.10 in damages, subject to statutory deductions for income tax and national insurance. The claims against the second respondent were dismissed. | Upheld | — | £938 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,080
- 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.