Case 1805266/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Connor v Chief Constable South Yorkshire Police — 2021
- Case reference
- 1805266/2020
- Decision date
- 3 February 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Davies Appearances
- Venue
- By CVP
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Connor
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was heard by CVP on 3 February 2021 before Employment Judge Davies. The judgment records that the claimant’s claim of unauthorised deduction from wages in respect of mileage expenses was dismissed on withdrawal because the amount had been paid. The tribunal therefore recorded no substantive adjudication on that item beyond the withdrawal following payment.
The tribunal also dismissed as not well-founded the claims of unauthorised deduction from wages and breach of the Working Time Regulations 1998 in respect of holiday pay. No remedy was awarded. The judgment does not record any split of compensation because none was ordered.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim for unauthorised deduction from wages in respect of mileage expenses was dismissed on withdrawal after the amount had been paid. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim in respect of holiday pay was found not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Working time regulations | Claim under the Working Time Regulations 1998 in respect of holiday pay was found not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.