Mr B. Hamilton v Hydro Cleansing Limited — 2024

Judge G. King dealt with the claimant's application for reconsideration of the tribunal's earlier judgment dated 7 March 2024. The tribunal records that the underlying case had concerned alleged failure to provide itemised payslips, failure to provide a P45, and an alleged data breach; it states that the claimant had succeeded on the payslip complaint, had not succeeded on the P45 complaint, and that the data-breach claim had already been dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

On reconsideration, the tribunal refused to reopen the decision. It held that there was no reasonable prospect of the judgment being varied or revoked. The tribunal explained that a complaint under ss.8, 11 and 12 ERA 1996 ordinarily gives rise to a declaration, and to a monetary award only where unnotified deductions are shown.

The tribunal found that no unlawful deduction claim had ever been pleaded or raised. It said the payslip evidence showed the claimant had been correctly paid, with only tax and National Insurance deductions authorised by s.14 ERA 1996. It also stated that it had no power to punish employers or award arbitrary sums, and that the remedy in the earlier judgment was a declaration only, with no monetary value on the facts found.