Case 3321500/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Szalanski (Friend) Assisted by an interpreter: Ms M Dubiel (Language: Polish) For the v Mr R Carter (Managing Director) — 2020
- Case reference
- 3321500/2019
- Decision date
- 7 February 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Laidler Appearances
- Venue
- Bury St Edmunds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Szalanski (Friend) Assisted by an interpreter: Ms M Dubiel (Language: Polish) For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing in Bury St Edmunds on 7 February 2020, Employment Judge Laidler held that the claim was received out of time. The tribunal found that it was not just and equitable to extend time.
The judgment records that all claims were dismissed. No monetary award was made, and the written record notes that reasons had been given orally at the hearing.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Dismissed because the claim was received out of time and the tribunal found it was not just and equitable to extend time. The judgment does not separately set out the underlying allegations, but the case listing identifies race discrimination. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Dismissed because the claim was received out of time and the tribunal found it was not just and equitable to extend time. The judgment does not separately set out the wage claim particulars, but the case listing identifies unlawful deduction from wages. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- just and equitable to extend time
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.