Case 1402505/2022 · Employment Tribunal
In person assisted by his brother Mr M. Paulinski v Respondent — 2025
- Case reference
- 1402505/2022
- Decision date
- 21 May 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Smail Appearances
- Venue
- Plymouth
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person assisted by his brother Mr M. Paulinski
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing before Employment Judge Smail at Plymouth on 9 May 2025. The tribunal dealt with two matters arising from the claim form presented on 24 September 2024. First, the claim in respect of the alleged assault on 21 May 2024 was dismissed because it had been presented out of time.
Second, the claim for detriment on the ground of protected disclosure was struck out. The judgment says it had no reasonable prospects of success and was wholly unparticularised. No monetary remedy was awarded or recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The claim presented on 24 September 2024 in respect of the alleged assault on 21 May 2024 was dismissed for being presented out of time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | The claim for detriment on the ground of protected disclosure, in the claim form presented on 24 September 2024, was struck out because it had no reasonable prospects of success and was wholly unparticularised. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- out of time
- no reasonable prospects of success
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.