Case 3323862/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Galacki v Goldstar Heathrow Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 3323862/2021
- Decision date
- 22 September 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shastri-Hurst
- Venue
- Reading
- Panel members
- Mrs B Osborne, Mrs E Jones
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Galacki
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing in Reading on 21 September 2023, before Employment Judge Shastri-Hurst sitting with Mrs B Osborne and Mrs E Jones, the tribunal disposed of the case by striking out the claimant's claims as having no reasonable prospect of success. The judgment records only that outcome and does not set out written reasons in the published record.
The case was listed on GOV.UK under age discrimination and unlawful deduction from wages, so those are the claims extracted here. On the available text, both claims were struck out rather than determined after a full merits hearing.
The tribunal also refused the respondent's application for costs. No monetary award was made to the claimant, and the written record does not provide any split or calculation of compensation.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age discrimination | The written judgment records that the claimant's claims were struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success. The claim type is taken from the case listing category for age discrimination. | Struck out | Age | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The written judgment records that the claimant's claims were struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success. The claim type is taken from the case listing category for unlawful deduction from wages. | Struck out | — | — |
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.