Case 1600211/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr. S. Smith v Royal Mail Group Ltd. HELD BY: CVP — 2021
- Case reference
- 1600211/2021
- Decision date
- 4 October 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge T. Vincent Ryan
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr. S. Smith
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr S. Smith, brought a claim against Royal Mail Group Ltd for unauthorised deductions from wages. The hearing was held by CVP on 30 September 2021 before Employment Judge T. Vincent Ryan. The respondent was represented by counsel and the claimant represented himself.
The tribunal's judgment was that the claimant's claims of unauthorised deductions from pay for the periods 14 or 15 to 28 October 2020, 23 to 27 November 2020, and 7 December 2020 to 6 or 7 January 2021 were not well-founded. Those claims failed and were dismissed.
The written record states that reasons had been given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested; no such request was made at the hearing. No financial award was recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal held that the claimant's allegations of unauthorised deductions from pay for the periods 14/15-28 October 2020, 23-27 November 2020, and 7 December 2020-6/7 January 2021 were not well-founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.