Case 4104697/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms K Kalkowska v Represented by M Solicitor Ciociara Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 4104697/2024
- Decision date
- 9 September 2024
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Sangster
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms K Kalkowska
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal in Glasgow on 6 September 2024, with judgment sent on 9 September 2024, upheld Ms K Kalkowska's claims against Ciociara Limited for unfair dismissal under s.104 ERA 1996, wrongful dismissal, and unlawful deduction from wages. It also found that the respondent failed to provide a written statement of particulars of employment required by s.1 ERA.
On unfair dismissal, the tribunal awarded a compensatory award of £3,028.21. It recorded that no basic award was payable because of the claimant's length of service.
The wrongful dismissal complaint also succeeded because the respondent dismissed the claimant without 1 week's notice, which the tribunal treated as a breach of contract. No separate award was made on that claim because of the compensatory award already ordered.
The tribunal further found that £2.71 of holiday pay had been unlawfully deducted from the claimant's wages on termination, contrary to s.13 ERA and recoverable under s.23 ERA. In addition, because the claimant succeeded in claims of a kind listed in Schedule 5 of the Employment Act 2002 and had not been given a written statement, the tribunal awarded four weeks' pay capped at £571 per week, totalling £712.52 under s.38(3). It also directed that tax and employee national insurance could be deducted from the gross sum at paragraph 3 if required by law.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Claim under s.104 ERA 1996 succeeded; the tribunal awarded a compensatory award only and said no basic award was payable because of the claimant's length of service. | Upheld | — | £3,028 |
| Wrongful dismissal | The tribunal found the respondent was in breach of contract by dismissing the claimant without 1 week's notice. No separate award was made because of the compensatory award above. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found a gross sum of £2.71 was unlawfully deducted from holiday pay on termination, contrary to s.13 ERA, recoverable under s.23 ERA. | Upheld | — | £3 |
| Other | The tribunal found the respondent failed to give the claimant a written statement of particulars of employment required by s.1 ERA. It then awarded four weeks' pay capped at £571 per week under s.38(3) Employment Act 2002 because the claimant had succeeded in claims of a kind listed in Schedule 5 and no statement had been issued. | Upheld | — | £713 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,743
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £0
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £3,028
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
6 references- s.104 ERA 1996
- s.23 ERA
- s.13 ERA
- s.1 ERA
- Schedule 5 Employment Act 2002
- s.38(3) Employment Act 2002
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.