Case 1302992/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Gawryś v Polish Restaurant Cracovianka Ltd (in Voluntary Liquidation) — 2023
- Case reference
- 1302992/2023
- Decision date
- 21 September 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Coghlin KC
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Gawryś
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard on 21 September 2023 at Birmingham by CVP before Employment Judge Coghlin KC. The respondent had not entered a response, but the claimant also did not attend the hearing and was not represented. The tribunal recorded that the claimant had not participated in the proceedings beyond one email, and had not complied with case management directions requiring a schedule of loss, witness evidence and a hearing bundle.
The tribunal noted that it had tried to assist the claimant by sending a pro forma schedule of loss, chasing him for compliance, and attempting to contact him by telephone shortly before the hearing, without success. The judge also noted that the respondent appeared to have been incorrectly named on the ET1 and directed that its name be amended to Polish Restaurant Cracovianka Ltd (in Voluntary Liquidation).
In those circumstances, and because the claimant did not attend the hearing or explain his absence, the tribunal dismissed the claims for unauthorised deductions from wages, unpaid holiday pay and breach of contract. No compensation or other monetary remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.