Case 3320238/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Mikolajczak v Bicester Logistics Ltd (In liquidation) — 2020
- Case reference
- 3320238/2019
- Decision date
- 7 September 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hawksworth
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Mikolajczak
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent, Bicester Logistics Ltd (in liquidation), failed to serve a response, so the tribunal issued judgment under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. On that basis, the tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of the net sum of £9,387.36.
The tribunal also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £1,100.00. The judgment records that this was a gross sum, and that if the respondent pays any tax and national insurance due to HMRC on these payments, payment of the net amount will satisfy the judgment debt. The combined amount awarded was £10,487.36.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Judgment entered under Rule 21 because the respondent did not present a response. | Upheld | — | £9,387 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal recorded that this was a gross sum; if the respondent pays any tax and national insurance due to HMRC on these payments, payment of the net amount will meet the judgment debt. | Upheld | — | £1,100 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £10,487
- across all upheld claims
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.