Case 6001413/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Kulig v Smartchoice Dental Construction Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 6001413/2023
- Decision date
- 31 October 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge JM Wade
- Venue
- By CVP
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Kulig
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr M Kulig worked for Smartchoice Dental Construction Ltd as a construction worker. The judgment says he became ill with back pain and was dismissed in May 2023 after about 14 months' absence, with no clear return-to-work date. His claim form identified notice pay, redundancy pay and disability discrimination, and the tribunal recorded that the discrimination complaint was understood as a section 15 Equality Act dismissal complaint. The respondent accepted that he was a disabled person by reason of back pain.
At the CVP hearing on 31 October 2023, Employment Judge JM Wade recorded a consent judgment rather than listing the matter for a final hearing. The notice pay claim was not defended and the respondent agreed to pay £3,140 gross. The judgment also records £1,929 gross as compensation for termination of employment, while stating that the redundancy payment and disability discrimination complaints were withdrawn and dismissed. The total payable under the consent judgment was £5,069.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Notice pay was not defended; the consent judgment records an agreed gross payment of £3,140. | Settled | — | £3,140 |
| Redundancy | The judgment records a gross payment of £1,929 as compensation for termination of employment, but clause 3 also says the redundancy payment complaint was withdrawn and dismissed. | Withdrawn | — | £1,929 |
| Disability discrimination | The tribunal recorded that the respondent accepted the claimant was a disabled person by reason of back pain; the complaint was withdrawn and dismissed by consent judgment. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,069
- across all upheld claims
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.