Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
(A) None of the claimant's claims against the first-named respondent ("Blondy's") is well-founded. Accordingly, all of those claims are dismissed.
(B) None of the claimant's claims against the respondent Ms Anna Murawska ("Ms Murawska") is well-founded. Accordingly, all of those claims are dismissed.
(C) The claimant's unfair dismissal claim against the respondent Ms Izabella Tomasik ("Ms Tomasik") is well-founded and it is ordered that Ms Tomasik shall pay to the claimant the sum of £605 in respect of that unfair dismissal.
(D) The claimant's holiday pay claim against Ms Tomasik is well-founded and it is ordered that the third-named respondent shall pay to the claimant the sum of £1,009 in respect of holiday pay.
(E) The claimant withdrew all of her other claims against Ms Tomasik. Accordingly, all of those other claims are dismissed.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.