Case 1804073/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr W L Sze v Pollington Transport Company Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 1804073/2023
- Decision date
- 7 September 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge McAvoy Newns
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr W L Sze
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal substituted Pollington Transport Company Limited as the correct respondent because the name used by the parties, Pollington Transport Co Limited, did not exist at Companies House. The claimant was represented in person and the respondent by a lay representative before Employment Judge McAvoy Newns in Leeds on 7 September 2023.
The respondent accepted liability for the claimant’s claim for unauthorised deductions from wages. The tribunal recorded that the claim was well founded and succeeded. During the hearing, the parties agreed a settlement of the claim in the sum of £1,250.
The tribunal therefore ordered the respondent to pay £1,250 gross to the claimant. The judgment states that the sum was gross and that the claimant was required to account for any income tax and/or national insurance contributions due on it.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The respondent accepted liability during the hearing. The tribunal recorded that the claim for unauthorised deductions from wages was well founded and that the parties agreed settlement in the sum of £1,250 gross, payable subject to any income tax and/or national insurance contributions due. | Settled | — | £1,250 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,250
- 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.