R Nowak v Mach Recruitment Ltd: 6012865/2025
JUDGMENT
The complaint in respect of holiday pay is not well-founded and is dismissed.REASONS
[1]Neither party attended today’s hearing. Both parties were telephoned by my clerk but his calls went unanswered. I proceeded in the absence of the parties using my power under Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure.[2]The claimant had not produced a witness statement nor supporting documentary evidence. The respondent had also provided no statements or documentation to the Tribunal.[3]Prior to making my decision I considered the claim form and all the correspondence that the claimant had sent to the Tribunal. The last correspondence from the claimant was his email of 29 July 2025 where he stated, “I want to submit written statements for review in my absence. I was defrauded of holiday hours by the Mach agency. I already included a message earlier saying I was defrauded of several holiday hours (the message clearly describes how many hours are missing). I am requesting a positive review of my case and that I receive payment for the missing holiday hours and compensation for the time I wasted contacting Acas and filing a court case (several hours) against the Mach agency. All hours worked for the Mach agency are documented on payslips. Therefore, the message Mach included in this case is not true, but a lie and deception of the court and myself. Thank you.” Following that email, no written submissions, statements or documentary evidence was received from the claimant.[4]I also considered the response submitted by the respondent. Taking all matters into account, I decided that the complaint in respect of holiday pay was not well founded and dismissed the claim. Approved by: