Case 1601706/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Ms K Winiarska v Ultra Tiles Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 1601706/2019
- Decision date
- 30 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brace Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms K Winiarska
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Brace determined the claim on 16 December 2019 in the absence of an ET3 response form from Ultra Tiles Limited. The judge recorded that there was sufficient material before the tribunal to make a proper determination and applied Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013.
The tribunal upheld two monetary claims: unpaid wages in the sum of £41.05 and notice pay in the sum of £188.83. The judgment does not set out any disputed factual findings beyond the absence of a respondent response, and it does not record any separate liability reasoning for either head of claim.
The total award was £229.88. The judgment also states that the claimant is responsible for any income tax or employee national insurance contributions that may be due on the sums awarded in respect of unpaid wages and unpaid holiday pay, although no separate holiday pay figure appears in the quantified award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal upheld the unpaid wages claim in the absence of an ET3 response form from the respondent, relying on Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013. | Upheld | — | £41 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal upheld the notice pay claim in the absence of an ET3 response form from the respondent, relying on Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013. | Upheld | — | £189 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £230
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
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.