Case 4103010/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Marek Lochowski v Kerr Transport (Scotland) Ltd — 2018
- Case reference
- 4103010/2018
- Decision date
- 1 May 2018
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ian McPherson
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Marek Lochowski
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent did not present a response within the required time after the claim form was sent on 6 March 2018. The Employment Judge therefore determined liability on the available material without a hearing under Rule 21, but considered that remedy could not properly be decided on the papers.
The judgment records that all three complaints succeeded: unfair dismissal, failure to pay notice pay, and failure to pay holiday pay. No substantive findings on quantum were made at this stage, and the remedy was expressly left to be determined at a later hearing before an Employment Judge.
The claimant was directed, within 14 days of issue of the judgment, to lodge a detailed schedule of loss and supporting vouching documents setting out the amounts claimed for each successful head of complaint. The tribunal also referred to the possibility of a statutory uplift under section 207A TULRCA 1992 in relation to an unreasonable failure to follow the ACAS Code of Practice.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Liability determined under Rule 21 after the respondent failed to enter a response; remedy reserved for a later hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Claim described as failure to pay notice pay; liability determined under Rule 21 and remedy reserved. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Claim described as failure to pay holiday pay; liability determined under Rule 21 and remedy reserved. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- Rule 21, Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
- Rule 16, Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
- s.207A TULRCA 1992
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.