Case 6008776/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr B Smykovski, Litigation Executive For the v Mr H Singh, Director — 2025
- Case reference
- 6008776/2024
- Decision date
- 13 June 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Kenward
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr B Smykovski, Litigation Executive For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis judgment was delivered following an application for costs rather than a substantive liability claim. Employment Judge Kenward, sitting alone at Manchester by video on 9 May 2025, held that the Claimant's application for costs succeeded in part.
The tribunal ordered the Respondent, Sharp Hawk UK Limited, to pay the Claimant's solicitors, on behalf of the Claimant, £177.30 inclusive of VAT. The order was made to reflect costs incurred by the Claimant as a result of the Respondent's unreasonable conduct within the proceedings.
The written record states that the reasons had been given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested. No further findings, substantive claim outcomes, or separate remedy breakdown were recorded in the judgment text provided.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment concerns the Claimant's application for costs. It succeeded in part, and the Respondent was ordered to pay £177.30 inclusive of VAT by 19 June 2025 in respect of costs incurred as a result of unreasonable conduct within the proceedings. | Upheld | — | £177 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £177
- 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.