Case 1806116/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Adrian Weglarz v The Best Solutions Hull Limited Heard: by CVP on 6 and 7 August 2025 and, in chambers, on 22 September 2025 — 2025
- Case reference
- 1806116/2024
- Decision date
- 7 August 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ayre Representation
Parties
2 namedKey findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Ayre, sitting alone, dismissed all of the claimant's remaining complaints. The claims under the Working Time Regulations 1998 and ERA sections 44(1)(b) and 45A had previously been withdrawn. The claim of detriment under sections 44 and 48 ERA 1996 (health and safety) was not well-founded.
On the unauthorised deductions claim, the Judge found that there was no agreement to pay overtime for hours worked Monday to Friday (the contract only provided overtime for weekends and bank holidays). The claimant's £39,000 annual salary covered all his weekday hours, including those above 45 per week. Even on the maximum 62.52 hours/week that the claimant calculated, the gross weekly pay equated to £11.99/hour - in excess of the £10.42 National Minimum Wage. The single weekend overtime shift on 11 February 2024 had been paid for separately.
On itemised pay statements, the respondent had complied with section 8 ERA 1996; hours need only be shown on a payslip where pay varies by reference to time worked, and the relevant overtime payslip did include those hours. The claim was dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
5 claims adjudicated| Claim type | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|
| Working time regulations | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Other | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Other | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 referencesSource document
Primary recordThe full judgment is available 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.