Case 2202882/2022 · Employment Tribunal

Mrs J Uszakiewicz v Argent (Property Development) Services LLP Heard: At London Central (via CVP) — 2024

Case reference: 2202882/2022
Decision date: 19 July 2024
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Codd
Panel members: Dr V Weerasinghe, Ms R Butler

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mrs J Uszakiewicz

Respondent

Argent (Property Development) Services LLP Heard: At London Central (via CVP)

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The tribunal dismissed Mrs J Uszakiewicz's complaint of direct race discrimination. No further detail is included in the extracted judgment text about the factual basis for that claim, beyond the finding that it was not well founded.

The unfair dismissal complaint succeeded. The tribunal found that the claimant had been unfairly dismissed. It also found that she caused or contributed to the dismissal by blameworthy conduct and that it was just and equitable to reduce any compensatory award by one third. The extracted text does not set out the underlying factual findings or any monetary amount for the award.

The tribunal also upheld the breach of contract complaint in relation to notice pay. The extracted text does not record a separate sum for that claim or any further remedy details. The reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing.

Claims and outcomes

3 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Race discrimination	The complaint was direct race discrimination.	Dismissed	Race	—
Unfair dismissal	The tribunal found the claimant was unfairly dismissed and also found that she caused or contributed to the dismissal by blameworthy conduct, reducing any compensatory award by one third.	Upheld	—	—
Breach of contract	The breach of contract complaint related to notice pay.	Upheld	—	—

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.