Case 3304015/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr L Wojcik v The Chief Constable of Northamptonshire Police and 1 other — 2021
- Case reference
- 3304015/2020
- Decision date
- 5 August 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Warren Members
- Panel members
- Ms E Deem, Mr D Snashall
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr L Wojcik
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the case on 2 to 5 August 2021 before Employment Judge M Warren, sitting with members Ms E Deem and Mr D Snashall. The published judgment records that the claimant, Mr L Wojcik, brought claims of race discrimination, unfair dismissal and notice pay against the Chief Constable of Northamptonshire Police and Mr S Marshall.
The judgment states that all three claims failed and were dismissed. The published record does not contain written reasons because the reasons were given orally at the hearing, and it notes that written reasons would only be provided if requested in time. No remedy or monetary award is recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment refers to the claim as 'notice pay' and dismisses it; no separate reasoning or monetary figure is given in the published text. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.