Case 1401475/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Frysz v GMJ Automotive Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 1401475/2023
- Decision date
- 9 January 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Livesey Representation
- Venue
- Bristol
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Frysz
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that Mr D Frysz was a worker, but not an employee of GMJ Automotive Ltd. On that basis, his unfair dismissal complaint was dismissed, and his breach of contract complaint relating to notice was also dismissed.
The tribunal upheld the claimant's complaints of unlawful deductions from wages and unpaid holiday pay. It awarded £950.00 in respect of wages and £255.20 in respect of holiday pay.
The judgment also records that the claimant did not receive itemised pay statements. No separate monetary award is set out for that finding in the written record.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal awarded £950.00 in respect of wages. | Upheld | — | £950 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal awarded £255.20 in respect of unpaid holiday pay. | Upheld | — | £255 |
| Other | The judgment records that the claimant did not receive itemised pay statements, but no separate monetary award is stated for that finding. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the claimant was a worker, not an employee, and dismissed the unfair dismissal complaint. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The breach of contract complaint relating to notice was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,205
- across all upheld claims
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.