Case 1406191/2023 · Employment Tribunal

- IN PERSON FOR THE v Respondent — 2024

Case reference: 1406191/2023
Decision date: 26 July 2024
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Cadney Dated

Indexed: 21 May 2026

Parties

1 named

Claimant

- IN PERSON FOR THE

Respondent

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The claimant, who was employed from 4 May 2021 and was part of the Senior Leadership Team, brought claims arising from an alleged performance-related bonus of £10,000 for 2021. The tribunal found that the respondent’s ordinary bonus scheme did not apply to SLT members and that any SLT bonus was non-contractual and discretionary. In mid-January 2022 the claimant and Mr Bresnihan orally agreed a £10,000 bonus, split as £6,000 for 2021 Q4 and £4,000 annual performance bonus, and that was confirmed by a letter dated 1 February 2022, but the bonus was not paid.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Breach of contract	Claim about failure to pay an alleged £10,000 performance-related bonus for 2021. The tribunal found there was no outstanding contractual right to the bonus by the time the claim was brought.	Dismissed	—	—
Unlawful deduction from wages	Claim about non-payment of the same £10,000 bonus. The tribunal held there was no unlawful deduction because the contractual right had been lost or varied and, alternatively, the payment remained discretionary.	Dismissed	—	—

Legal tests applied

6 references

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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.