Case 2408731/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs I Mokrzynska v Short Stay (NW) Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2408731/2020
- Decision date
- 29 January 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shotter Appearances
- Venue
- Liverpool
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs I Mokrzynska
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a remote case management hearing before Employment Judge Shotter on 15 December 2020 in which the claimant, Mrs I Mokrzynska, pursued a claim for payments said to be due under the Furlough Scheme between April and August 2020. The respondent did not attend. The tribunal recorded that the case was not ready for trial and that the claimant said she had sent documents, including a translated Polish email said to confirm she would be paid under the Furlough Scheme and should not take another job, but that the document could not be found on the tribunal file.
The claimant said her employment continued and that she had been placed on furlough. The respondent's position, as recorded by the tribunal, was that the claimant was on a zero-hours contract and that her employment ended on 31 March 2020. The tribunal noted that, if that account were accepted, statutory notice did not appear to have been paid. No finding was made on those competing positions at this hearing.
The tribunal adjourned the claim in the interests of justice so that both parties could prepare and present their evidence at a liability hearing. It also directed that a Polish interpreter be arranged for the final hearing and recorded the respondent's correct name as Short Stay (NW) Limited.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal adjourned the claimant's claim for unpaid wages under the Furlough Scheme from April to August 2020 to a final hearing; no liability finding was made at this hearing. | Other | — | — |
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.