Case 1403190/2018 · Employment Tribunal

Samuel Malkin v Structural Steel Craft — 2019

Case reference: 1403190/2018
Decision date: 15 March 2019
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Mr. M.
Venue: Southampton

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Samuel Malkin

Respondent

Structural Steel Craft

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

Samuel Malkin did not attend the hearing on 15 March 2019 and had not provided a witness statement in advance. The tribunal read the witness statement of the respondent's managing director, Nick Kazakos, and the respondent's bundle, and heard from the respondent's legal advocate. The tribunal noted that the respondent had deducted £200 from the claimant's wages in respect of damage he was said to have caused to its property, but the sum was repaid after legal advice and after the claim was presented. On that basis, the tribunal was satisfied there had been an unlawful deduction from wages and made a declaration to that effect.

The claimant's breach of contract claim concerned notice pay. The tribunal was not satisfied that the claim was made out and, having read Mr. Kazakos's evidence, was satisfied that the claimant had received the pay to which he was entitled. That claim was therefore dismissed as not well founded. The judgment records no monetary award beyond the repayment of the £200 deduction and does not set out any separate compensation figure.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unlawful deduction from wages	The respondent accepted a deduction of £200 from wages in respect of damage said to have been caused to its property. The money was repaid after legal advice and after presentation of the claim; the tribunal nevertheless found the deduction unlawful and made a declaration to that effect.	Upheld	—	—
Breach of contract	The breach of contract claim related to notice pay. The tribunal was satisfied the claimant received the pay he was entitled to and dismissed the claim as not well founded.	Dismissed	—	—

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.