Case 3302180/2022 · Employment Tribunal

Mr L Jurczykowski v Amazon UK Services Limited — 2024

Case reference: 3302180/2022
Decision date: 5 September 2024
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Cowen
Venue: Watford
Panel members: Mr S Bury, Ms M Harris

Indexed: 18 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr L Jurczykowski

Respondent

Amazon UK Services Limited

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The Tribunal held that the unfair dismissal claim was presented out of time and that it had no jurisdiction to hear that claim. The claimant's disability discrimination claims succeeded only in relation to two discrimination arising from disability allegations: the First Letter of Concern dated 19 August 2020 and the final Letter of Concern under the absence procedure dated 12 October 2021.

The Tribunal dismissed the claimant's other discrimination and victimisation claims. In relation to dismissal, it concluded that the respondent's decision was a proportionate means of achieving the legitimate aims of maintaining workforce stability and ensuring business delivery, taking account of the length of absence, the information available, and the claimant's engagement with the return to work process.

The judgment did not decide compensation. It listed a separate remedy hearing for 30 May 2025 to determine compensation for the two successful claims only.

Claims and outcomes

5 findings recorded

This case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unfair dismissal	The judgment states the unfair dismissal claim was issued out of time and the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear it.	Other	—	—
Disability discrimination	The reasonable adjustments claim was included in the issues but the judgment states all other discrimination claims, apart from two discrimination arising from disability allegations, were dismissed.	Dismissed	Disability	—
Disability discrimination	The claims for discrimination arising from disability succeeded in relation to UT5, the First Letter of Concern dated 19 August 2020, and UT15, the final Letter of Concern under the absence procedure dated 12 October 2021.	Upheld	Disability	—
Disability discrimination	The remaining discrimination arising from disability allegations, including the dismissal allegation, were dismissed.	Dismissed	Disability	—
Victimisation	The Tribunal found no evidence that the principal reason for dismissal was the claimant having issued Tribunal proceedings.	Dismissed	—	—

Legal tests applied

7 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.