Case 3200848/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Alicja Szczerbicka v ADP Special Products Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 3200848/2022
- Decision date
- 17 August 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hook Representation
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Alicja Szczerbicka
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 17 August 2022, Employment Judge Hook heard the case of Miss Alicja Szczerbicka v ADP Special Products Ltd at the East London Hearing Centre. The tribunal recorded two claims in the proceedings: unlawful deduction from wages and automatic unfair dismissal.
The tribunal held that the unlawful deduction from wages claim was well founded and ordered the respondent to pay the claimant £262.80 gross in respect of that claim. The judgment does not set out any further reasoning or split the award between the claims.
The judgment also records that the claimant's automatic unfair dismissal claim was withdrawn by the claimant on the day of the hearing and dismissed. No other liability findings or remedy awards are stated in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the claim well founded and ordered payment of £262.80 gross. No separate split between claims was given. | Upheld | — | £263 |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment describes this as a claim of automatic unfair dismissal. It says the claim was withdrawn by the Claimant on the day of the hearing and dismissed. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £263
- 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.