Case 6011316/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Kolcz v Dropp Logistics — 2026
- Case reference
- 6011316/2025
- Decision date
- 13 February 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bradford Representation
- Venue
- Bristol
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Kolcz
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Bradford, sitting at Bristol by video, considered a strike-out application at a hearing the claimant did not attend. The claimant, a HGV driver, had brought claims for arrears of pay and holiday pay alleging he was owed £1,000; the respondent had accepted £72.33 was owed.
The Tribunal had repeatedly directed the claimant to set out the calculation of the sum he claimed and given a strike-out warning. The judge found that the claimant was aware of the hearing and had decided not to attend, and had repeatedly failed to comply with case management orders. Balancing fairness, the interests of the parties and finality, the judge exercised her discretion under rule 38(1)(c) of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 and struck out the claim. No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Arrears of pay claim struck out under rule 38(1)(c) for failure to comply with Tribunal orders. | Struck out | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Struck out under rule 38(1)(c) for failure to comply with Tribunal orders. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- rule 38(1)(c) Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
- rule 47 Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
- 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.