Case 3201232/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Martyna v Randstad Solutions Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 3201232/2019
- Decision date
- 25 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Burgher Dated
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Martyna
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal amended the Respondent's name from Randstad In-House Services (Philips Avent) Limited to Randstad Solutions Limited.
The claim related to a possible transfer of undertakings between OSR Recruitment Services Limited and the Respondent on 6 January 2019, and to payment of accrued holiday pay and unpaid wages before 7 January 2019. The judgment records that the Claimant settled these claims by COT3, withdrew the claims by correspondence to the Tribunal on 23 September 2019 under connected claim number 3200615/2019, and the proceedings were dismissed following withdrawal.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Transfer of undertakings (TUPE) | The judgment says the claim related to a possible transfer of undertakings and that the claims were settled by COT3, then withdrawn and dismissed following withdrawal. | Settled | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The judgment refers to payment of accrued holiday pay, says the claims were settled by COT3, and records dismissal following withdrawal. | Settled | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment refers to unpaid wages prior to 7 January 2019, says the claims were settled by COT3, and records dismissal following withdrawal. | Settled | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.