Case 2413277/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs E Powala 2nd Claimant: Mrs E Wolczyk v Epic Ops Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2413277/2020
- Decision date
- 23 June 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Buzzard
- Venue
- Liverpool
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs E Powala 2nd Claimant: Mrs E Wolczyk
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 13 and 15 June 2022, Employment Judge Buzzard sat alone in Liverpool to hear the two claimants' claims against Epic Ops Ltd. The Equality Act 2010 discrimination claims were dismissed on withdrawal by the claimants. The holiday pay claims were also dismissed on withdrawal after the respondent had paid the outstanding holiday pay.
The unpaid wages claims for 23 March 2020 to 30 March 2020 succeeded because the respondent conceded them at the hearing. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay each claimant £194, and recorded that the parties had agreed that figure represented 80% of one week's pay.
The written record also included the standard tribunal interest notice. It stated that the relevant decision day was 23 June 2022, the calculation day was 24 June 2022, and the stipulated rate of interest was 8%, but no separate interest sum was quantified in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The Equality Act 2010 discrimination claims were dismissed on withdrawal by the claimants. The extracted text does not identify the protected characteristic. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The holiday pay claims were dismissed on withdrawal after the respondent had paid the outstanding holiday pay. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The unpaid wages claims for 23 March 2020 to 30 March 2020 succeeded after the respondent conceded the issue at the hearing. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay each claimant £194, agreed by the parties as 80% of one week's pay. | Upheld | — | £194 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £388
- 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.