Case 8001534/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Jolanta Ozga v The Highland Laundry Room Ltd and 1 other — 2026
- Case reference
- 8001534/2024
- Decision date
- 5 February 2026
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge A Kemp
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Ms Jolanta Ozga
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs Jolanta Ozga began work for The Highland Laundry Room Ltd on 9 April 2024 as a Laundry Assistant. At the final hearing on 30 January 2026 she withdrew the direct race discrimination claim, so that claim and the claim against Mr Neil Forbes fell away. The tribunal also recorded that complaints about the P45 termination date and pension information were outside its jurisdiction.
The tribunal found that no written statement of particulars of employment had ever been provided. It rejected the respondent's position that part-time workers or employees thought to be in a probationary period were not entitled to one, found the omission was not merely technical, and held that section 38 of the Employment Act 2002 was engaged. Using average gross pay of £820 per month, or £189.23 per week, it awarded four weeks' pay, amounting to £756.92.
The payslip claim under section 8 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 failed because the tribunal found the payslips were provided with the relevant payments. The unlawful deductions claim succeeded: the tribunal found the claimant resigned on 17 July 2024 with effect from 26 July 2024, that July wages were not paid until 2 August 2024, and that accrued holiday pay was not paid until 25 October 2024. It treated both late payments as deductions under section 13(3), awarded £50 for financial loss under section 24(2), and stated the total award was £806.92.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Direct race discrimination claim was withdrawn by the claimant at the start of the final hearing; the claim against the second respondent was dismissed as a result of that withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Race | — |
| Other | Failure to provide a written statement of particulars of employment under sections 1 to 4 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Upheld | — | £757 |
| Other | Claim under section 8 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 for a payslip / written pay statement. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Late payment of July 2024 wages and accrued holiday pay was treated as an unauthorised deduction from wages. | Upheld | — | £50 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £807
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
6 references- ss.1-4 Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.8 Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.13 and s.13(3) Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.24(2) Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.38 and s.38(5) Employment Act 2002
- Regulation 14 Working Time Regulations 1998
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.