Case 1300055/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr L Linton v Amey Services Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 1300055/2023
- Decision date
- 10 September 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cuthbert Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr L Linton
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant was employed by the respondent as a carpenter/joiner at HMP Brinsford. He claimed that his wages should have included a 15% shift allowance for working weekends, in addition to his salary, overtime, and standby/on-call allowance. The tribunal identified the central issue as whether that allowance was properly payable to him under section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
The tribunal found that the claimant's written contract did not contain any express term entitling him to the 15% shift allowance, and that there had been no oral agreement or discussion creating such an entitlement. The claimant accepted that he had received the salary, overtime payments, and standby allowance provided for in his own contract.
Although some other employees in the same role had contracts including a 15% shift allowance, the tribunal found that this did not create a contractual or other legal entitlement for the claimant. It found no basis to imply such a term into his contract by custom and practice or otherwise. The claimant had received all wages properly payable to him, so the unlawful deductions from wages claim failed and was dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claim concerned an alleged entitlement to a 15% shift allowance for weekend working. The tribunal found no legal entitlement to the allowance and dismissed the unlawful deductions from wages claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
6 references- section 13 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 23 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 27 Employment Rights Act 1996
- Casson Beckman and Partners v Papi
- Ali v Petroleum Co of Trinidad and Tobago
- Sagar v H Ridehalgh and Son Ltd
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.