Case 6005730/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Michal Glowacki v EVTEC Aluminium Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 6005730/2025
- Decision date
- 27 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Camp Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Michal Glowacki
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to make representations on why the whistleblowing and race discrimination claims should not be struck out on the basis that they had no reasonable prospect of success.
The claimant replied that he had not intended to make, and was not making, whistleblowing or race discrimination claims. He raised no objection to those claims being struck out, and the Tribunal exercised its discretion to strike them out. The judgment states that other claims were not affected and would continue.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | The claimant confirmed that he had not intended to make, and was not making, a whistleblowing claim. The Tribunal struck out the claim as having no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The claimant confirmed that he had not intended to make, and was not making, a race discrimination claim. The Tribunal struck out the claim as having no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- no reasonable prospect of success
- overriding objective
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.