Case 2303096/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr. A. Kersse v Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust — 2025
- Case reference
- 2303096/2024
- Decision date
- 15 September 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sudra
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr. A. Kersse
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Kersse began work for Epsom and St. Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust as a shuttlebus driver on 29 May 2021 following a TUPE transfer. He was paid £12.27 per hour for 63.4 hours each week, comprising 42 worked hours and 21.4 hours of downtime. The tribunal found that the Trust had continued these payments because of an administrative oversight and was not seeking to recover the resulting overpayments.
In May 2023, the Trust introduced a new pay model under which eligible staff received £13.75 per hour. It did not apply that rate to Mr Kersse because his pay for hours actually worked equated to £18.52 per hour. A letter stating that his rate had risen to £13.75 was sent to him by mistake on 6 June 2023 and corrected that day. The Trust asked him several times for evidence of a contractual right to payment for downtime, but he provided none. His pre-transfer contract stated a basic working week of 37.5 hours and did not mention downtime.
Applying section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and the general rules of contract governing what was properly payable, the tribunal held that Mr Kersse bore the burden of proving the claimed contractual entitlement. Although it found the witnesses on both sides credible, it preferred the Trust's evidence where accounts differed because that evidence was backed by documents. As there was no proof of an entitlement to payment for 63.4 hours or for unworked downtime, the unauthorised deductions claim was not well founded and was dismissed. No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claimant did not prove a contractual entitlement to payment for 63.4 hours per week, including 21.4 hours of unworked downtime. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- s.13 Employment Rights Act 1996
- general rules of contract when determining what is properly payable
- Cleeve Link Ltd v Bryla [2014] IRLR 86
- burden on the claimant to prove contractual entitlement
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.