Case 2307107/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Melbourne-Heaver v SVL Healthcare Services Ltd Heard by video — 2024
- Case reference
- 2307107/2023
- Decision date
- 2 May 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Corrigan Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Melbourne-Heaver
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Corrigan heard the case by video on 2 May 2024. The claimant appeared in person and the respondent did not appear. The tribunal corrected the respondent’s name to SVL Healthcare Services Ltd.
The claimant’s complaint of unlawful deduction of wages was found to be well founded. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £4,180, subject to deductions for tax and National Insurance.
The judgment set out the award as £890 for wages due for 20-23 October 2023, £645 for 28-30 October 2023, £430 for 5-8 November 2023, £910 for 12-16 November 2023, £255 for unpaid overtime for the weeks ending 20 September 2023, 8 October 2023 and 15 October 2023, £720 for pay in lieu of notice (48 x £15), and £330 for annual leave due in the final payment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal held the claim well founded and ordered payment of £4,180, subject to deductions for tax and National Insurance. The award was broken down in the judgment into unpaid wages, unpaid overtime, notice pay, and annual leave due in the final payment. | Upheld | — | £4,180 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,180
- across all upheld claims
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.