Case 1800882/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Whitehead v Riviera Multimedia Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 1800882/2022
- Decision date
- 1 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Knowles Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Whitehead
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Leeds by video on 6 June 2022 before Employment Judge Knowles, with the Claimant appearing in person and no attendance for the Respondent. The tribunal gave oral reasons at the hearing and later issued the written record of decision. The judgment records no lay members and no separate written reasons unless requested.
The tribunal held that the Claimant’s claim of unauthorised deductions from wages was well founded and succeeded. It ordered the Respondent, Riviera Multimedia Ltd, to pay the Claimant £9,567.24 gross. The judgment also directed that the Respondent was responsible for deductions at source in relation to employees’ national insurance contributions and income tax and for accounting to HMRC as required by law.
The Claimant’s claim relating to pension loss was found not well founded and was dismissed. The judgment does not break out any separate monetary award for that head of claim, and the only sum ordered was the gross wage deduction award of £9,567.24.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claimant’s claim of unauthorised deductions from wages succeeded. The tribunal ordered the Respondent to pay £9,567.24 gross and to account for employee national insurance contributions and income tax at source. | Upheld | — | £9,567 |
| Other | The judgment states that the Claimant’s claim relating to pension loss was not well founded and was dismissed. No separate award was made for this head of claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £9,567
- 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.