Case 3213172/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Jewniewicz v Heley International Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 3213172/2020
- Decision date
- 6 December 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge BA Elgot
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
- Panel members
- Ms M Legg, Mr L Bowman
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Jewniewicz
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the East London Hearing Centre on 25 and 26 November 2021, Employment Judge BA Elgot sitting with Ms M Legg and Mr L Bowman upheld Mr J Jewniewicz's unfair dismissal complaint against Heley International Ltd. The tribunal said the compensation for that claim would be determined at a remedy hearing to be fixed later, so no quantified unfair dismissal award appears in the extracted judgment.
The age discrimination claim was dismissed. The tribunal also recorded that the effective date of termination was 14 November 2019, when the claimant was notified of his dismissal by letter, and on that basis held that he was entitled to one week's wages for the period 7-14 November 2019, subject to tax and national insurance deductions. The extracted text does not name any legal tests and does not state a total monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal upheld the unfair dismissal complaint, but compensation was left to a remedy hearing to be fixed later. | Upheld | — | — |
| Age discrimination | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | Age | — |
| Other | The tribunal recorded that the claimant was entitled to one week's wages for 7-14 November 2019, subject to tax and national insurance deductions, because the effective date of termination was 14 November 2019. The extracted text does not identify this as a separately labelled cause of action. | Upheld | — | — |
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.