Case 2404628/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr JW Bobrowski v Forward Xpress Ltd (In Voluntary Liquidation) — 2023
- Case reference
- 2404628/2022
- Decision date
- 26 September 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Mark Butler
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr JW Bobrowski
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal amended the respondent's name to Forward Xpress Ltd (In Voluntary Liquidation), noting that Arthur Tozowonach was the name of the owner/director rather than the employing legal entity. It found that Mr JW Bobrowski was an employee of the respondent and that the hearing proceeded on 21 September 2023, with the respondent not attending.
On liability, the tribunal upheld a claim for unauthorised deductions from wages. It found deductions in respect of holiday pay and unpaid wages, awarding £1,695.40 for 10 days of unpaid holiday pay and £339.08 for 2 days of unpaid wages, both calculated at a gross daily rate of £169.54.
The tribunal also upheld a breach of contract claim for unpaid notice pay. It found that the claimant was entitled to 10 days' notice pay and awarded £1,695.40, again calculated at £169.54 per day. The total gross award was £3,729.88, subject to tax and any other statutory deductions at source.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found unauthorised deductions from wages in respect of holiday pay and unpaid wages. The award within this claim comprised £1,695.40 for 10 days' unpaid holiday pay at £169.54 per day and £339.08 for 2 days' unpaid wages at £169.54 per day. | Upheld | — | £2,034 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the respondent breached the claimant's contract in respect of unpaid notice pay. The claimant was held entitled to 10 days' notice pay at £169.54 per day. | Upheld | — | £1,695 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,730
- across all upheld claims
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.