Case 1800206/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Neil Borowiak v Martin Nietrzebka (sole trader) trading as Dentwizard — 2023
- Case reference
- 1800206/2023
- Decision date
- 17 April 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge G Elliott Representation
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Neil Borowiak
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant worked for the respondent from spring 2021 until 14 October 2022, after receiving training funded by the respondent. In a conversation in March 2021, before he started training, Mr Nietrzebka said that if the claimant left within three years he would ask for the training fees back. A detailed written contract was emailed to the claimant on 24 August 2022, but he did not sign it or indicate acceptance of its terms. After the claimant resigned on 11 September 2022 and worked a month's notice, the respondent said he had to repay training costs of £5,410 and then withheld his October pay.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found a single unauthorised deduction from the claimant's October 2022 wages and ordered payment of the gross sum, subject to applicable tax and employee national insurance deductions. | Upheld | — | £2,438 |
| Other | The claim for a remedy under s.38 Employment Act 2002 for failure to provide written particulars failed because the tribunal found the written contract had been provided before the claim was presented and did not find sufficient grounds to declare it non-compliant with s.1 ERA 1996. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,438
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
6 references- s.13 Employment Rights Act 1996
- Fairfield Limited v Skinner
- Yorkshire Maintenance Company Limited v Farr
- s.1 Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.38 Employment Act 2002
- Govdata Limited v Denton
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.