Case 4100177/2026 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs M Jedrzejewicz v [via Ms A Pikul - Interpreter] Exellerate Services UK Ltd — 2026
- Case reference
- 4100177/2026
- Decision date
- 19 May 2026
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Phillips
- Venue
- Dundee
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs M Jedrzejewicz
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs Jedrzejewicz contended that she was automatically unfairly dismissed for asserting a statutory right. She relied on a WhatsApp message sent to her line manager at 08.40 on 28 January 2026 asking how much annual leave she had left and whether it had to be used within a particular period or could be carried over. Because she had less than two years’ service, it was for her to prove on the balance of probabilities that the sole or principal reason for dismissal was the asserted automatically unfair reason.
The Tribunal found that the message was no more than a request for information about her entitlement. It was not framed, and could not reasonably have been understood, as an allegation that the respondent had infringed or intended to infringe a statutory right. It therefore did not engage section 104(1)(b) ERA.
The Tribunal was also satisfied that the decision to dismiss had been taken by Sarah Newland on 26 January 2026, before the holiday-entitlement message was sent. It found that the reason was the claimant’s unauthorised absence from her shift on 24 January, which she did not report until 26 January. The cleaning duties were not performed and no alternative cover was arranged. Clause 9 of the employment contract provided that an absence not properly authorised or notified would be unauthorised and could, in appropriate circumstances, result in summary dismissal. The Tribunal found no local arrangement permitting the claimant to miss a shift and delay reporting it, and found that the timing of the decision and its communication did not prevent disciplinary action.
The Tribunal concluded that the reason for dismissal was the claimant’s conduct on 24 January 2026, not her request for holiday information on 28 January. The automatic unfair dismissal claim was dismissed, and no monetary award was recorded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Automatic unfair dismissal for asserting a statutory right under section 104 ERA. The Working Time Regulations 1998 were relied on as the source of the alleged statutory right; no separate working-time claim was adjudicated in this judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- section 104(1)(b), ERA
- sole or principal reason for dismissal
- balance of probabilities
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.