Mr A Sherwin v Kwi Business Group Limited — 2023

Mr A Sherwin brought a claim against Kwi Business Group Limited for unauthorised deductions from wages under section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. At the outset, the hearing was limited to that claim and the claimant confirmed that no holiday pay claim was being pursued. The tribunal recorded that all other claims were dismissed following withdrawal.

The deductions in issue were £120 said to relate to a loss of contract at Waddlend and £105 said to relate to compensation payable to Tate Smith. The respondent accepted that the deductions had been made, but the tribunal found there was no evidence that the claimant owed those sums, no evidence explaining how either amount had been calculated, and no evidence showing the connection between the claimant's conduct and the sums deducted. The tribunal also noted that the wage slip described the deductions as a loan repayment, but none of the deductions arose from any loan.

Applying section 13 ERA 1996 and the approach noted in Yorkshire Maintenance Company Ltd v Farr EAT 0084/09, the tribunal concluded that the deductions were not authorised. It accepted that the claimant had not done some of the work he had been paid for, and that there had been some wrongdoing on his part, but the respondent's stated reasons for the deductions were not supported by the evidence.

On remedy, the tribunal took account of the claimant's concessions that some sum should properly have been deducted for the work not done. It assessed the appropriate deduction at £50 for Waddlend and £15 for Tate Smith, and ordered the respondent to pay £165 gross in total, made up of £70 for Waddlend and £95 for Tate Smith.