Case 6024937/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs Katarzyna Borcowska v T07558385 Limited, formerly ‘Advanced Services (West Midlands) Limited’ — 2026
- Case reference
- 6024937/2025
- Decision date
- 18 June 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bennett Representation
- Venue
- Birmingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs Katarzyna Borcowska
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent did not present a valid response on time or at all. Following the hearing on 18 June 2026, Employment Judge Bennett decided that the claim could properly be determined under Rule 22 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024.
The Tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from Mrs Katarzyna Borcowska’s wages and awarded £2,136.75 gross for pay due on 29 May 2025. It also found that she was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded £2,991.45 in damages.
The Tribunal found that Mrs Borcowska was dismissed by reason of redundancy and awarded a redundancy payment of £4,487.18, calculated as 1.5 times weekly gross pay of £427.35 for seven years. It further awarded £769.23 gross for nine days of accrued but untaken holiday. The total sum payable was £10,384.61.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Gross award for pay due on 29 May 2025. | Upheld | — | £2,137 |
| Breach of contract | Damages for dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice. | Upheld | — | £2,991 |
| Redundancy | Redundancy payment calculated as 1.5 times weekly gross pay of £427.35 times 7 years. | Upheld | — | £4,487 |
| Holiday pay | Gross award for 9 days of accrued but untaken holiday. | Upheld | — | £769 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £10,385
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 22 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
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.