Case 6015513/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Mateusz Smialek v Miramar Engineering Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6015513/2024
- Decision date
- 16 June 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge MJ Smith
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Mateusz Smialek
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a hearing at Watford by video on 16 June 2025, before Employment Judge MJ Smith, the claimant, Mr Mateusz Smialek, appeared in person and the respondent, Miramar Engineering Limited, was represented by Gregory Pelling, the owner. The written record states that the tribunal gave its reasons orally at the hearing and that no written reasons would be provided unless requested.
The judgment records two claims. First, the claimant’s complaint of failure to provide written pay statements was found not well-founded and was dismissed. Second, the claimant’s claim for unlawful deduction of wages was also found not well-founded and was dismissed. No financial award is recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Claim for failure to provide written pay statements; dismissed as not well-founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim for unlawful deduction of wages; dismissed as not well-founded. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.