Case 4105263/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Mr P Crolla and Mr C Crolla T/a The Gold Sea Take Away — 2022
- Case reference
- 4105263/2022
- Decision date
- 14 December 2022
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sangster
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard by CVP in Edinburgh on 8 December 2022 before Employment Judge Sangster. The claimant, Mr K Drobnik, appeared in person and the respondents, Mr P Crolla and Mr C Crolla trading as The Gold Sea Take Away, were represented by Mr P Crolla.
The written judgment records that the claimant brought two complaints: that the respondents failed to pay him for his statutory annual leave entitlement under regulation 16 of the Working Time Regulations 1998, and that he was entitled to compensation under section 38 of the Employment Act 2002 because the respondents had failed to provide written particulars of employment.
The tribunal's judgment states that both complaints did not succeed and were dismissed. The extracted text records that oral reasons were given at the hearing, but those reasons are not included in the written extract supplied here.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | Complaint that the respondents failed to pay the claimant for his statutory annual leave entitlement, contrary to regulation 16 of the Working Time Regulations 1998. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | Complaint for compensation under section 38 of the Employment Act 2002, said to arise from the respondents' failure to provide written particulars of employment. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.