Case 2601061/2024 · Employment Tribunal
S Adamczyk v Vinyl SpaceLtd. T/A Oakley Court Hotel — 2024
- Case reference
- 2601061/2024
- Decision date
- 14 October 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge McTigue Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
S Adamczyk
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the Midlands East Employment Tribunals on 10 May 2024. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, so Employment Judge McTigue determined the claim under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. No contested hearing or reasons beyond the rule 21 judgment are recorded in the extracted text.
The tribunal found that S Adamczyk had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £3,190. It also found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £4,785. The judgment records a total award of £7,975.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The tribunal held the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £3,190 under rule 21. | Upheld | — | £3,190 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal held the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and awarded a redundancy payment of £4,785 under rule 21. | Upheld | — | £4,785 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £7,975
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.