Case 1400732/2023 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Mr S Belsom T/a SJS Security — 2023
- Case reference
- 1400732/2023
- Decision date
- 21 August 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss Sarah Ball worked for Mr Scott Belsom, trading as SJS Security, from 16 March 2022 until she resigned on 24 October 2022. The tribunal accepted that Mr Belsom was the correct respondent, rejected the suggestion that there was a partnership or that a separate limited company existed, and found that relevant employment documents were not produced, including a statement of terms and itemised pay statements.
The claimant succeeded in her unlawful deduction from wages claim under section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The tribunal found that £679.00 gross wages due for October 2022 were not paid, and that a further £598.40 had been deducted from the claimant's wages between May and September 2022 on the basis that 25% of gross wages was to be withheld pending HMRC registration, but those sums were not paid to HMRC. The tribunal held that these were unlawful deductions and ordered Mr Belsom to pay the gross sum of £1,277.40.
The respondent's employer's contract claim against the claimant was dismissed. The tribunal held that it had no jurisdiction to hear that claim because the claimant had not presented a breach of contract claim under article 3 of the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994, and article 4(d) only permits an employer counterclaim where that precondition is met.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found unlawful deductions totalling £1,277.40, made up of £679.00 gross unpaid for October 2022 and £598.40 deducted from wages for May to September 2022 inclusive and not paid to HMRC. | Upheld | — | £1,277 |
| Breach of contract | The respondent's employer's contract claim was dismissed because the tribunal had no jurisdiction under article 4(d) of the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994, as the claimant had not first presented a breach of contract claim under article 3. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,277
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
3 references- section 13 Employment Rights Act 1996
- article 3 Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994
- article 4(d) Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994
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.