Case 1310879/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Radzinski-Kalisz v Central Window Systems Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 1310879/2022
- Decision date
- 9 August 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gidney
- Venue
- Midlands West
- Panel members
- Mr Nicholas Howard, Ms Janet Jerram
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Radzinski-Kalisz
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant was employed as Quality Health & Safety Manager and raised concerns in August 2022 about health and safety matters, including the mezzanine floor, PPE, training, fire exits, safe systems of work and related issues. The tribunal found that a number of those concerns were protected disclosures and accepted that the claimant had raised them with senior managers.
The tribunal found that Matthew Kelly was told that the claimant had complained about him tying her hands on health and safety and that he decided to retaliate by dismissing her. It upheld the claim of automatic unfair dismissal for making protected disclosures under s103A ERA.
The tribunal dismissed the harassment claim. It found that the 17 May 2022 text message was not sexual in nature or related to sex and did not have the required purpose or effect. It accepted that the June 2022 comment was made and was related to sex, but held that it was a single act presented out of time and that it was not just and equitable to extend time.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | The tribunal upheld the claim of automatic unfair dismissal for making a public interest disclosure under s103A ERA. Remedy was reserved for a later hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
| Harassment | The tribunal dismissed the harassment claim. One text message was found not to be of a sexual nature or related to sex, and the later comment was out of time with no just and equitable extension. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
Legal tests applied
10 references- s43B Employment Rights Act 1996
- s43C Employment Rights Act 1996
- s103A Employment Rights Act 1996
- s26 Equality Act 2010
- Babula v Waltham Forest College
- Kilraine v London Borough of Wandsworth
- Igen v Wong
- Reverend Canon Pemberton v Right Reverend Inwood
- Land Registry v Grant
- just and equitable extension of time
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.