Case 1601112/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Louis Morgan v Lyons Holiday Park Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 1601112/2022
- Decision date
- 13 April 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge HV Dieu
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Louis Morgan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Cardiff by CVP on 27 March 2023 before Employment Judge H V Dieu sitting alone. The tribunal dismissed Mr Louis Morgan’s unfair dismissal claim as not well founded.
The tribunal upheld Mr Morgan’s unlawful deduction from wages claim and ordered Lyons Holiday Park Limited to pay £3,227.03 gross. The written judgment records that it was the claimant’s responsibility to ensure the correct amount of tax was paid.
The tribunal also found the breach of contract claim to be well founded, but made no separate award on that claim because the claimant was already compensated through loss of wages. The judgment contains no written reasons beyond recording that reasons were given orally at the hearing.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Awarded as gross wages deduction; the judgment states the claimant is responsible for ensuring the correct tax is paid. | Upheld | — | £3,227 |
| Breach of contract | Found well founded, but no separate award was made because the claimant was already compensated through loss of wages. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,227
- across all upheld claims
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.