Case 3314500/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Stanislawczyk v Ach Bodyshop Tariq Zar — 2020
- Case reference
- 3314500/2019
- Decision date
- 3 February 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge The Claimant’s
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Stanislawczyk
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment made because the time for presenting a response had expired and no valid response had been presented in time. On the information before Employment Judge Bedeau, the tribunal found that Mr P Stanislawczyk's claims of unpaid wages, holiday pay and protected disclosure succeeded.
The judgment did not determine remedy. It stated that any remedy to which the claimant is entitled would be determined at a remedy hearing, and that notice of that hearing would be given in due course. No monetary award is recorded in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment records that the claimant's claim of unpaid wages succeeded. No separate monetary award was fixed in this judgment; remedy was listed for a later hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The judgment records that the claimant's claim of holiday pay succeeded. No separate monetary award was fixed in this judgment; remedy was listed for a later hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | The judgment states that the claimant's claim of protected disclosure succeeded. No separate monetary award was fixed in this judgment; remedy was listed for a later hearing. | 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.
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.