Case 4100154/2020 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4100154/2020 Mr Z Wilgosiewicz v EE HR Solution Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 4100154/2020
- Decision date
- 6 July 2020
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Maclean Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4100154/2020 Mr Z Wilgosiewicz
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a rule 21 judgment issued because no response had been presented to the claim. On the available material, the Employment Judge found that Mr Z Wilgosiewicz had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice. The tribunal ordered EE HR Solution Limited to pay damages of £1,231.50, calculated as 5 weeks at £246.30 per week.
The tribunal also found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy. On that basis, it held that he was entitled to a redundancy payment of £1,847.25, calculated as 7.5 weeks at £246.30 per week. No separate award for basic award, compensatory award, injury to feelings, or interest is recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered damages of £1,231.50, calculated as 5 weeks at £246.30 per week. | Upheld | — | £1,232 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and held that he was entitled to a redundancy payment of £1,847.25, calculated as 7.5 weeks at £246.30 per week. | Upheld | — | £1,847 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,079
- 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.