Case 1405922/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Kwiatkowski v Powis Hotels Employment Services Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 1405922/2020
- Decision date
- 3 August 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Livesey Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Kwiatkowski
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was listed for hearing on 23 March and standard directions were issued. The file showed difficulty contacting the claimant and a failure to comply with case management directions. In particular, the claimant did not provide a calculation of his losses and did not reply despite correspondence from both the respondent and the Tribunal.
On 10 July the Tribunal specifically asked the claimant to provide an indication of his alleged losses by return. He did not respond. A strike out warning was then issued on 22 July requiring compliance by 29 July. Although an email was later received from the claimant, it contained no calculation of loss and was said to be only a copy of an earlier email sent on 25 February 2021 with one small sentence added.
Employment Judge Livesey held that the claimant had failed to engage with the Tribunal and the respondent, had failed to comply with case management directions, and had failed to heed the warning of 22 July. The claim was therefore struck out under rules 37(1)(c) and/or (d) of the Employment Tribunals Rules, and the hearing did not take place.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Struck out under rules 37(1)(c) and/or (d) because the claimant failed to comply with case management directions and did not provide a calculation of loss despite correspondence and a strike out warning. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out under rules 37(1)(c) and/or (d) because the claimant failed to engage with the Tribunal and the respondent, did not provide a calculation of loss, and did not heed the strike out warning. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 37(1)(c) of the Employment Tribunals Rules
- rule 37(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunals Rules
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.