Case 1401478/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Attended via CVP v Mr T Bishop — 2023
- Case reference
- 1401478/2023
- Decision date
- 11 July 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Boyce Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Attended via CVP
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting at Exeter via CVP on 26 June 2023 before Employment Judge Boyce, found that Mr Barney Clare’s complaint of unauthorised deduction from wages was well-founded. It ordered Mr Tom Bishop to pay £365 net in respect of that claim, with the respondent separately responsible for any tax and National Insurance due on that sum.
The tribunal also found that the respondent had failed to provide the claimant with written terms of employment. Under Employment Act 2002 s38(3), it ordered an additional £514.42, described as two weeks’ pay, and stated that no tax was due on that award. The total amount ordered was £879.42, payable within 14 days of the order being sent to the parties.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal said the complaint of unauthorised deduction from wages was well-founded and awarded £365 net; the respondent was responsible for any tax and National Insurance due separately. | Upheld | — | £365 |
| Other | The tribunal found the respondent failed to provide written terms of employment and, under Employment Act 2002 s38(3), ordered £514.42, stated to represent two weeks' pay and to be free of tax. | Upheld | — | £514 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £879
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Employment Act 2002 s38(3)
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.