Case 2303118/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Przemyslaw Gutkowski v Creatio Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 2303118/2022
- Decision date
- 10 January 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tsamados Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Przemyslaw Gutkowski
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the London South Employment Tribunals on 04 September 2022. The respondent did not present a valid response on time, and Employment Judge Tsamados Date decided that judgment could properly be entered under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. The hearing listed for 02 February 2023 was cancelled.
The tribunal held that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant’s wages in respect of outstanding bonus and ordered payment of £3,869.73 gross. It also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement and ordered £76.08 gross.
The judgment further ordered £7,915.91 gross described as unpaid employer contributions. The total payable was £11,861.72 gross, and the claimant was responsible for any amounts due to HMRC in respect of tax or national insurance contributions.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unauthorised deductions from wages in respect of outstanding bonus. | Upheld | — | £3,870 |
| Holiday pay | Failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £76 |
| Other | Described in the judgment as unpaid employer contributions. | Upheld | — | £7,916 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £11,862
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals 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.