Case 3322814/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P R Juszczyk v The Tyre Store Limited t/a Just Tyres Heard via Cloud Video Platform (Watford) — 2023
- Case reference
- 3322814/2021
- Decision date
- 7 January 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Davidson Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P R Juszczyk
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard remotely on 4 January 2023 before Employment Judge Davidson. The claimant, Mr P R Juszczyk, appeared in person and the respondent was represented by Mr K Zaman, Counsel. The judgment records that the hearing was conducted by Cloud Video Platform and that a face-to-face hearing was not held because it was not practicable and all issues could be determined remotely.
The written judgment records three claims only: detriment due to requesting or taking paternity leave, breach of contract for failure to pay bonus, and unauthorized deduction from wages concerning overtime. The tribunal dismissed all three claims. No monetary award is recorded in the judgment, and no reasons are set out in the extracted record beyond the outcome itself.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Parental leave | The judgment records this as a claim of detriment due to requesting or taking paternity leave. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment identifies this as a breach of contract claim for failure to pay bonus. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment identifies this as an unauthorized deduction from wages claim concerning overtime. | 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.