Case 3324206/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Albena Breneska v Mediterranean Foods (London) Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 3324206/2019
- Decision date
- 11 May 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge G Tobin Members
- Venue
- Watford Hearing Centre
- Panel members
- Ms P Barratt, Mrs J Hancock
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Albena Breneska
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that Miss Albena Breneska made three protected disclosures on 3 July 2018, 28 May 2019 and 28 June 2019. It upheld two of the four claimed detriments connected with those disclosures: her suspension on 1 July 2019 and being blamed unfairly for a colleague’s mistake on 29 June 2019 and 1 July 2019. The tribunal also found that she was dismissed because she had made a protected disclosure, in breach of s103A Employment Rights Act 1996.
It further found that the claimant was unfairly dismissed under s94 Employment Rights Act 1996 and that the dismissal was in breach of contract, with notice pay due. Her separate claim that she had been underpaid annual leave entitlement under regulations 13 and 30 of the Working Time Regulations 1998 was dismissed.
The tribunal awarded £8,000 for injury to feelings arising from the protected disclosure detriments, £3,150.90 gross notice pay, and unfair dismissal compensation of £36,061.87, made up of a £3,937.50 basic award and a £32,124.37 compensatory award. The compensatory award included £22,979.41 for loss of earnings, £500 for loss of statutory rights, £742.96 for pension loss, £7,652 for retraining and £250 for job-search expenses. The total award was £47,212.77, with a prescribed element of £22,979.41 covering 30 August 2019 to 10 May 2022 and a balance of £24,233.36.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | The tribunal found that the claimant made three protected disclosures on 3 July 2018, 28 May 2019 and 28 June 2019. It upheld two of the four claimed detriments linked to those disclosures: her suspension on 1 July 2019 and being blamed unfairly for a colleague’s mistake on 29 June 2019 and 1 July 2019. The judgment also found that she was dismissed because she had made a protected disclosure, in breach of s103A Employment Rights Act 1996. | Upheld | — | £8,000 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract and was owed notice pay, recorded as £3,150.90 gross. | Upheld | — | £3,151 |
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found that the respondent unfairly dismissed the claimant in breach of s94 Employment Rights Act 1996. | Upheld | — | £36,062 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found that the claimant was not underpaid in respect of her annual leave entitlement under regulations 13 and 30 of the Working Time Regulations 1998. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £47,213
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £3,938
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £32,124
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
4 references- s43B Employment Rights Act 1996
- s94 Employment Rights Act 1996
- s103A Employment Rights Act 1996
- regulations 13 and 30 Working Time Regulations 1998
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.