Case 3201759/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs N Kaminska v Healthier Tastier Food Ltd (In Administration) — 2024
- Case reference
- 3201759/2023
- Decision date
- 17 October 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Feeny Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs N Kaminska
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 17 October 2024, Employment Judge Feeny, sitting at East London Hearing Centre by CVP, heard the case of Mrs N Kaminska against Healthier Tastier Food Ltd (In Administration). The claimant appeared in person and the respondent did not attend and was not represented.
The tribunal found that the complaint of wrongful dismissal was well founded. It ordered the respondent to pay £9,231 gross of deductions for tax and national insurance in respect of that complaint.
The tribunal also found that the complaint of unfair dismissal was well founded. It awarded total damages of £10,901, made up of a basic award of £6,430 and a compensatory award of £4,471.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wrongful dismissal | The tribunal found the wrongful dismissal complaint well founded and ordered payment of £9,231 gross of deductions for tax and national insurance. | Upheld | — | £9,231 |
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the unfair dismissal complaint well founded and awarded total damages of £10,901, comprising a basic award of £6,430 and a compensatory award of £4,471. | Upheld | — | £10,901 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £10,901
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £6,430
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £4,471
- compensatory remedy recorded
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.