Case 2602055/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Kolodziejski v Rosen Haulage Ltd (in Voluntary Liquidation) — 2026
- Case reference
- 2602055/2023
- Decision date
- 26 April 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Adkinson Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Kolodziejski
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr M Kolodziejski brought a claim for unfair dismissal against Rosen Haulage Limited. The tribunal held that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires two years' service for an unfair dismissal complaint, and found that the claimant had been employed for less than two years.
On that basis, the tribunal found that the claimant was not entitled to bring the proceedings. It also recorded that the claimant had been given an opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but did not provide an acceptable reason. The claim was therefore struck out.
No monetary remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal complaint because the claimant had less than two years' service and was therefore not entitled to bring the claim under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The claimant did not give an acceptable reason, despite being given the opportunity, why the complaint should not be struck out. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.108 Employment Rights Act 1996
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.