Case 2601439/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Wawrzyniak v Carlisle Staffing plc t/a Guidant Global — 2020
- Case reference
- 2601439/2020
- Decision date
- 10 December 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Butler
- Venue
- Nottingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Wawrzyniak
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Nottingham on 10 December 2020 before Employment Judge Butler sitting alone. The Claimant, Mr S Wawrzyniak, appeared in person and the Respondent, Carlisle Staffing plc t/a Guidant Global, was represented by counsel. The judgment records that the tribunal gave reasons at the conclusion of the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days.
The tribunal dismissed the claims of unfair dismissal, automatic unfair dismissal, and unpaid wages as not well founded. It also found that the Respondent did not breach the provisions of the Agency Workers Regulations 2010. The short judgment does not set out detailed findings of fact or a separate remedy assessment, and no monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the claim of unfair dismissal was not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | The judgment refers separately to a claim of automatic unfair dismissal, but no specific taxonomy label is available in the locked enum. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment refers to unpaid wages and says that claim was not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Agency worker regulations | The tribunal found that the Respondent did not breach the provisions of the Agency Workers Regulations 2010. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.