Case 3200946/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs A Jaguszewska v Newway Beauty Concept Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 3200946/2019
- Decision date
- 27 August 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge McLaren Representation
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs A Jaguszewska
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant had been employed as a head therapist from 1 August 2011, with later contractual transfers to Newway Holding (London) Ltd and then Newway Beauty Concept Ltd. While she was on annual leave, she received WhatsApp messages on 31 December 2018 and 3 January 2019 stating first that the beauty centre would close until 7 January and then that the company was permanently closed and under full administration. The tribunal found the effective date of termination was 3 January 2019, and noted that she had not received notice monies and had later received payments from the Insolvency Service calculated against a different company.
The tribunal upheld the unlawful deduction from wages claim for the period 1 December 2018 to 3 January 2019. It calculated gross unpaid wages at £2,528.19 and deducted £569.28 already paid to the claimant to avoid double recovery, leaving an award of £1,958.91. It also upheld the wrongful dismissal claim and awarded £3,109.96 gross as damages in lieu of notice for the period 3 December 2018 to 17 February 2019.
On unfair dismissal, the tribunal accepted that although the claimant's role could appear redundant, other colleagues were employed at other salons and some had been transferred there, so she could still have been working. It therefore found the dismissal unfair. The tribunal calculated a basic award on seven years' service at £3,556, then deducted the £1,016 redundancy payment already received, producing a basic award of £2,540. It also found that the claimant was making appropriate efforts to find work until 17 March 2019, when she decided to focus on her studies and a career change, so it limited compensation to one month and awarded a compensatory award of £2,416.66. The total monetary award was £10,025.53.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from wages for the period 1 December 2018 to 3 January 2019. It calculated gross unpaid wages at £2,528.19 and deducted £569.28 already paid by the Insolvency Service to avoid double recovery, leaving £1,958.91. | Upheld | — | £1,959 |
| Wrongful dismissal | The tribunal found the dismissal was in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages in lieu of notice. It calculated the notice period from 3 December 2018 to 17 February 2019 and awarded £3,109.96 gross. | Upheld | — | £3,110 |
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal upheld the unfair dismissal claim. It awarded a basic award of £2,540 after deducting the £1,016 redundancy payment already received, and a compensatory award of £2,416.66 for one month to 17 March 2019, finding no future loss beyond that date. | Upheld | — | £4,957 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £10,026
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £2,540
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £2,417
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
5 references- s123 ERA 1996
- just and equitable in all the circumstances
- duty to mitigate losses
- s13 ERA 1996
- 52 weeks' gross pay cap
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.