Case 4100277/2018 · Employment Tribunal
ETZ 4(WR) EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: S/4100277/2018 Heard on July 2018 at Edinburgh Employment Judge: J D Young (Sitting Alone) Grzegorz Ocytko
The claimant, Grzegorz Ocytko, brought a claim arising from pay due for work done for Zulfiquar Murtaza trading as Capital Wholesalers between 2 and 31 October 2017. At the hearing, the parties agreed that the gross wages due were £1,341.20, subject to a dispute about whether the claimant finished work at 14:15 or 12:30 on 21 October 2017. The tribunal found the 12:30 finish time more likely, using the timesheet evidence, the uncertainty over when the finish time had been entered, and the absence of a clear recollection from the claimant.
The tribunal held that tax and National Insurance were normal deductions and that the award should be for net pay. It therefore awarded £1,180.79, being the net sum due after deduction of Income Tax and National Insurance, in respect of arrears of wages. The respondent had initially said it had a contract claim against the claimant for £192.59, but at the hearing it was no longer insisting on that claim.
The claimant also sought an additional £500 said to cover preparation of letters, a day off work to attend the preliminary hearing, interest, and hurt feelings. The tribunal said no award could be made for that amount under the wages legislation relied on. It found there was no evidence of direct financial loss attributable to the non-payment, and that costs or expenses connected with tribunal attendance had to be dealt with under the tribunal costs regime rather than through the wages claim. The judgment noted the statutory interest regime, but no interest sum was included in the award.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal awarded the net sum due for arrears of wages after deducting Income Tax and National Insurance. The separate £500 request for compensation was refused, and the respondent was no longer pursuing its asserted contract claim of £192.59. | Upheld | — | £1,181 |
The 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.
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.