Case 3200656/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs Malgorzata Witulska Mrs Edyta Borys v D&S Trading Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 3200656/2021
- Decision date
- 31 August 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Speker OBE
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs Malgorzata Witulska Mrs Edyta Borys
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a remote hearing before Employment Judge Speker OBE DL on 25 August 2021. The judgment records awards in favour of both claimants, Mrs Malgorzata Witulska and Mrs Edyta Borys, against D&S Trading Limited. No separate reasons are set out in the extracted text, but the tribunal disposed of the claims by making awards for redundancy payment and for breach of contract relating to notice.
For the first claimant, the tribunal ordered a redundancy payment of £1,080 and damages for breach of contract in relation to notice of £720. For the second claimant, the tribunal ordered a redundancy payment of £852 and damages for breach of contract in relation to notice of £568. The extracted judgment does not identify any additional remedies, and it does not record any discrimination, whistleblowing, or unfair dismissal findings.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The Respondent was ordered to pay the first Claimant, Mrs Malgorzata Witulska, a redundancy payment of £1,080. | Upheld | — | £1,080 |
| Breach of contract | The Respondent was ordered to pay the first Claimant damages for breach of contract in relation to notice in the sum of £720. | Upheld | — | £720 |
| Redundancy | The Respondent was ordered to pay the second Claimant, Mrs Edyta Borys, a redundancy payment of £852. | Upheld | — | £852 |
| Breach of contract | The Respondent was ordered to pay the second Claimant damages for breach of contract in relation to notice in the sum of £568. | Upheld | — | £568 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,220
- 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.