Case 1301378/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Mellor v Heverin Haulage Ltd Heard: In Birmingham by CVP — 2022
- Case reference
- 1301378/2022
- Decision date
- 6 May 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Codd Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Mellor
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard in Birmingham by CVP on 6 May 2022 before Employment Judge Codd. The claimant, Mr J Mellor, appeared in person and the respondent was represented by Mr Somji. The judgment records that the matter concerned deductions from wages and unpaid annual leave.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages by failing to pay him for time worked and, at times, paying him below the national minimum wage for the hours worked. The sum awarded for that element was £1,012 net.
The tribunal also found a failure to pay untaken annual leave. The sum awarded for that element was £624 net. The judgment states that the respondent shall pay the claimant the total net sum of £1,636, after PAYE and tax deductions.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found unauthorised deductions from wages by failing to pay the claimant for time worked and, at times, paying below the national minimum wage. The award for this part was £1,012 net. | Upheld | — | £1,012 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found an unauthorised deduction arising from failure to pay untaken annual leave. The award for this part was £624 net. | Upheld | — | £624 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,636
- across all upheld claims
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.