Case 3301575/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr K Vukov v Alcon Eyecare UK Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 3301575/2023
- Decision date
- 19 June 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brewer Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr K Vukov
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing in Watford by CVP on 19 June 2024, Employment Judge Brewer heard representations and struck out the claimant's claims in case 3301575/2023 under Rules 37(1)(b), (c) and (d) of the Employment Tribunals Procedure Rules 2013. The judgment records no separate findings on the merits of the pleaded claims and does not distinguish between them in the strike-out order.
The respondent's counterclaim succeeded because the claimant did not respond to it. Applying Rule 25 and Rule 21(2) of the 2013 Rules, the tribunal ordered the claimant to pay the respondent £12,195.69 in respect of sick pay, £243.94 in respect of overpayment of wages, and £800.00 in respect of IT equipment, making a total of £13,239.63.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The claimant's claims were struck out together under Rules 37(1)(b), (c) and (d) of the Employment Tribunals Procedure Rules 2013; the judgment did not give separate reasons by claim type. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The claimant's claims were struck out together under Rules 37(1)(b), (c) and (d) of the Employment Tribunals Procedure Rules 2013; the judgment did not give separate reasons by claim type. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claimant's claims were struck out together under Rules 37(1)(b), (c) and (d) of the Employment Tribunals Procedure Rules 2013; the judgment did not give separate reasons by claim type. | Struck out | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £13,240
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
3 references- Rules 37(1)(b), (c) and (d) of the Employment Tribunals Procedure Rules 2013
- Rule 25 of the Employment Tribunals Procedure Rules 2013
- Rule 21(2) of the Employment Tribunals Procedure Rules 2013
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.