Case 3314829/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Hernadi, Claimant’s Partner For both v N & S Fitness Ltd and 1 other — 2023
- Case reference
- 3314829/2022
- Decision date
- 10 May 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Postle
- Venue
- Norwich
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr Hernadi, Claimant’s Partner For both
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss Noemi Kincs succeeded in her complaint that she was automatically unfairly dismissed as a result of a TUPE transfer between N & S Fitness Limited and JD Fitness Group Limited. The written record awards a basic award of £3,461.52 in respect of that dismissal and does not split out any separate compensatory award.
The tribunal also found that the claimant had accrued 8 days' untaken holiday and awarded £503.92, and that there had been an unlawful deduction from wages in the sum of £2,350.00. The judgment records a total award payable by the second respondent of £6,315.47.
The record further states that the tribunal made a Preparation Time Order of £410.00. Reasons were given orally at the hearing, and the written record does not set out fuller reasons beyond the outcome and the monetary orders.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal recorded that the claimant was automatically unfairly dismissed as a result of a TUPE transfer between the first and second respondent. The judgment awarded a basic award of £3,461.52 in respect of that dismissal. | Upheld | — | £3,462 |
| Holiday pay | The claimant was found entitled to £503.92 for 8 days' untaken holiday. | Upheld | — | £504 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found an unlawful deduction from wages and ordered payment of £2,350.00. | Upheld | — | £2,350 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £6,315
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £3,462
- 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.