Case 3306461/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Krzysztof Wasala v Fusion Lifestyle — 2020
- Case reference
- 3306461/2019
- Decision date
- 18 December 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bedeau Representation
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Krzysztof Wasala
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Watford by Cloud Video Platform on 18 December 2020 before Employment Judge Bedeau. The claimant was Mr Krzysztof Wasala and the respondent was Fusion Lifestyle Ltd. The judgment records two claims: unfair dismissal under section 98(4) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and unfair dismissal under section 152 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992.
The tribunal held that both claims were not well-founded and dismissed them. No monetary award was made or recorded in the written judgment. The record also states that reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days of the written record being sent to the parties.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Claim brought under section 98(4) Employment Rights Act 1996; the judgment states it was not well-founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Trade union | Claim brought under section 152 Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992; the judgment states it was not well-founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.98(4) Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.152 Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
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.