Case 2414204/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs P O’Malley v Mrs A Duffty — 2022
- Case reference
- 2414204/2021
- Decision date
- 31 March 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sharkett REPRESENTATION
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs P O’Malley
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs P O’Malley’s employment was found to have transferred to Mrs A Duffty in October 2019 under the TUPE Regulations 2006. The tribunal sat in Manchester on 22 and 23 March 2022 before Employment Judge Sharkett. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested.
The tribunal held that the claimant’s unfair and wrongful dismissal claim was well founded and succeeded. The respondent agreed to pay the claimant £8,000 as compensation/damages. The written decision does not separate that sum between the unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal aspects of the successful claim.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment records that the claimant’s claim of unfair and wrongful dismissal was well founded and succeeds. The £8,000 agreed sum was not split between the successful dismissal claims. | Upheld | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The judgment records that the claimant’s claim of unfair and wrongful dismissal was well founded and succeeds. The £8,000 agreed sum was not split between the successful dismissal claims. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The claim for payment in lieu of holiday accrued but untaken at the date of dismissal was dismissed upon withdrawal by the claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £8,000
- 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.