Case 1803581/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Cowle v Air Plants Dust Extraction Ltd Heard: by CVP — 2024
- Case reference
- 1803581/2022
- Decision date
- 3 October 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ayre Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Cowle
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, a former Area Sales Engineer, brought a claim for unpaid commission against his former employer following the termination of his employment on 5 May 2022. He initially claimed £8,760, later revised the figure to £5,503.98 during the hearing, and accepted that his original figure had been an estimate. The respondent's evidence, supported by a commission spreadsheet, was that the claimant had been paid £10,560 in commission for the relevant financial year, which matched what was due under the commission scheme.
The Tribunal accepted the respondent's evidence as clear and credible. It found that the commission scheme operated such that no further commission was paid in respect of invoices issued after an employee left, even on contracts they had previously worked on or secured. The claimant produced no evidence to support his wider allegations that commission had been paid to others on sales he had secured.
The respondent conceded during the hearing that an invoice of £4,000 had been omitted from the spreadsheet, generating £120 of unpaid commission. The Tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from wages of £120 under section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, and ordered the respondent to pay that sum to the claimant.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claimant initially sought £8,760 in unpaid commission, later revised to £5,503.98. Tribunal found he had been paid all commission due except £120, which the respondent conceded during the hearing related to an invoice of £4,000 omitted from the commission spreadsheet. | Upheld | — | £120 |
| Breach of contract | The issues listed by the Tribunal included whether the respondent had breached the contract of employment by not paying all commission due. The judgment's operative order is framed solely as an unauthorised deduction from wages; no separate breach of contract award was made. Classified as 'other' to reflect that no distinct outcome was expressly stated. | Other | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £120
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
4 references- section 13 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 23 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 24 Employment Rights Act 1996
- Article 3 Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England & Wales) Order 1994
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.