Case 2213178/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms A Gardner v Riskcare Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 2213178/2024
- Decision date
- 3 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Singh Representation
- Venue
- London Central
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms A Gardner
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs A Gardner brought a claim for unlawful deduction from wages arising from a bonus dispute. She said the Respondent changed the bonus scheme in September 2023, which substantially reduced the amount of bonus she would receive, and claimed £13,362.53. The Respondent said the bonus was discretionary and was not an amount properly payable for the purposes of section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
The tribunal reviewed the employment documents and the bonus materials produced for different years. The 2022 contract said the bonus was payable at the company’s absolute discretion and that any bonus was purely discretionary and did not form part of contractual remuneration. The tribunal also considered earlier bonus documents and accepted that, although the same percentages had applied for a period, the scheme had changed over time and had been framed by the Respondent as a way of directing sales effort to current business priorities.
The tribunal found that the bonus scheme was not contractual but discretionary. It held that the wording of the documents showed an intention that the scheme could be changed, and that the Respondent had in fact altered the structure from time to time to suit business needs. It rejected the Claimant’s case that the 5% and 3% rates had become contractual through repetition over time.
On that basis, the tribunal held that the bonus amount claimed was not properly payable to the Claimant. The unlawful deduction from wages claim therefore failed and was dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
6 references- s.13 Employment Rights Act 1996
- New Century Cleaning Co Ltd v Church
- Ferrell Matthews and Weir v Hansen
- Thom v Hobart Real Estate
- Pendragon PLC v Jackson
- Horkulak v Cantor Fitzgerald International
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.