Case 3352958/2017 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Elesinnla, of counsel For the v Respondent — 2020
- Case reference
- 3352958/2017
- Decision date
- 28 January 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hyams
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr A Elesinnla, of counsel For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe matter was heard at Watford on 27 and 28 January 2020 before Employment Judge Hyams sitting alone. The judgment is a consent judgment and records that the claims brought by Mr D Kacprzycki against Metalcraft (Tottenham) Limited were dismissed on the claimant's withdrawal.
No substantive findings on liability are recorded in the judgment, and there is no award of compensation or other remedy. The judgment was sent to the parties on 4 February 2020.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment states that the claims were dismissed on their withdrawal by the claimant; no separate reasoning is given. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the claims were dismissed on their withdrawal by the claimant; no separate reasoning is given. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that the claims were dismissed on their withdrawal by the claimant; no separate reasoning is given. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The judgment states that the claims were dismissed on their withdrawal by the claimant; no separate reasoning is given. | Withdrawn | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.