Case 2601311/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss E R Cunningham v Moko (Market Harborough) Ltd (in Creditors Voluntary Liquidation) — 2023
- Case reference
- 2601311/2022
- Decision date
- 12 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss E R Cunningham
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal issued a Rule 21 judgment in favour of Miss E R Cunningham against Moko (Market Harborough) Ltd (in Creditors Voluntary Liquidation). It found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered payment of £10,314.81.
The tribunal also found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice, and ordered damages of £1,458.80. It further found that holiday pay had not been paid and ordered £2,504.81 in respect of that claim.
On the unfair dismissal claim, the tribunal held that the claimant was unfairly dismissed and awarded a basic award of £1,562.85. The judgment does not record any compensatory award, interest, or other separate remedy beyond the amounts set out in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £10,315 |
| Breach of contract | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £1,459 |
| Holiday pay | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £2,505 |
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £1,563 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £15,841
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £1,563
- statutory, unfair dismissal
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.