Case 2500919/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs N Garside v That Healing Feeling — 2022
- Case reference
- 2500919/2022
- Decision date
- 16 December 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Withers Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs N Garside
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs N Garside’s claim against That Healing Feeling was heard by Employment Judge Withers at Newcastle by video on 16 December 2022. The respondent did not attend. The judgment records two successful claims arising from termination of employment.
First, the tribunal held that the respondent was in breach of contract because it dismissed the claimant without notice. It ordered the respondent to pay damages of £144.00 for that breach.
Second, the tribunal held that the respondent made an unauthorised deduction from wages by failing to pay the claimant in lieu of accrued but untaken annual leave on termination of employment. It ordered payment of £246.00 in respect of the amount unlawfully deducted.
The judgment does not record any other remedy components, and the total amount awarded was £390.00.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the respondent dismissed the claimant without notice and awarded damages for breach of contract. | Upheld | — | £144 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from wages because the respondent did not pay the claimant in lieu of accrued but untaken annual leave on termination of employment. | Upheld | — | £246 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £390
- 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.