Case 2209005/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss K Medkova v Pivo Ltd (in liquidation) — 2023
- Case reference
- 2209005/2022
- Decision date
- 18 April 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss K Medkova
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningNeither party attended or was represented at the hearing on 18 April 2023 before Employment Judge A M Snelson at London Central. The Tribunal used rule 48 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013 to convert the matter from a preliminary hearing to a final hearing, being satisfied that no prejudice would result to either party.
The Tribunal recorded that the claim was, on its face, out of time and that the Claimant had advanced no case to the contrary. On that basis, the Tribunal held that it had no jurisdiction to consider the claims.
The judgment contains no substantive findings on the merits of the underlying complaints and records no monetary award. The claims were dismissed in full for lack of jurisdiction.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment does not set out the underlying factual basis of the claim in the extracted text. The Tribunal dismissed the claim as out of time and for want of jurisdiction. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The judgment does not set out the underlying factual basis of the claim in the extracted text. The Tribunal dismissed the claim as out of time and for want of jurisdiction. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013, r48
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.