Case 1403842/2021 · Employment Tribunal
(1) Mr I Kaliszewski (2) Mr C Greenwood v Haydon Hudson Group Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 1403842/2021
- Decision date
- 12 April 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Midgley Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
(1) Mr I Kaliszewski (2) Mr C Greenwood
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment in which the respondent failed to present a valid response on time, so the Employment Judge decided that a determination could properly be made without a hearing. The claimants were Mr I Kaliszewski and Mr C Greenwood, and the respondent was Haydon Hudson Group Limited.
The tribunal held that the claimants' claims of breach of contract, unauthorised deduction of wages, and failure to provide a written statement of employment particulars were well founded and therefore succeeded. The judgment did not set out any monetary remedy because remedy was adjourned to a hearing listed for 10 June 2022.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
| Other | The judgment also found the claim for failure to provide a written statement of employment particulars to be well founded. The extracted text does not state a separate statutory label beyond that description. | Upheld | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.