United Kingdom Judgment

Ms A M Janicka v Curtis Holt Ltd (England and Wales : Breach of Contract) [2026] UKET 2313068/2024 (11 March 2026)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Material facts

Parties

Ms A M Janicka

Claimant

Curtis Holt Ltd

Respondent

02

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Employment Tribunal / Judgment

03

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Whether the respondent breached the employment contract with the claimant

04

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Common Law

    An employer is liable for damages if found to have breached the terms of an employment contract.

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

Court record

Judgment

[2026] UKET 2313068/2024

[ Home ] [ Databases ] [ World Law ] [ Multidatabase Search ] [ Help ] [ Feedback ] [

DONATE ] United Kingdom Employment Tribunal You are here:

BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Tribunal >> Ms A M Janicka v Curtis Holt Ltd (England and Wales : Breach of Contract) [2026] UKET 2313068/2024 (11 March 2026) URL: https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKET/2026/2313068_2024.html Cite as: [2026] UKET 2313068/2024 [ New search ] [ Printable PDF version ] [ Help ] Ms A M Janicka v Curtis Holt Ltd (England and Wales : Breach of Contract) [2026] UKET 2313068/2024 (11 March 2026) A HTML version of this file is not available click here or view below the pdf version : [2026] UKET 2313068/2024 BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII URL: https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKET/2026/2313068_2024.html

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

No structured authorities are available for this judgment.

Refer to the full judgment and official source for citations that have not yet been extracted.

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.