Case 2400524/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Goodhead v Laird Assessors Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 2400524/2022
- Decision date
- 26 January 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Anderson
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Goodhead
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr J Goodhead brought claims against Laird Assessors Limited for unlawful deduction from wages arising out of his 10 December 2021 pay. Employment Judge Anderson, sitting alone, found that clause 5.2 of the contract meant monthly salary was paid on or around the 10th of each month for the previous 10th-to-9th period, and clause 5.3 provided a one-day rate of 1/260th of annual salary. Looking at the claimant's start date in January 2010 and his first higher February 2010 payment, the tribunal rejected the claimant's understanding that the pay date covered the previous calendar month and accepted the respondent's explanation of the payroll cycle.
On the final-pay issue, the tribunal found that the claimant's last day of employment was 7 December 2021 and that the sum omitted from one payslip related to 8 and 9 December, when he was no longer employed. Although one payslip showed a £248.36 deduction for 'leave' and a lower net pay of £2,128.67, the claimant actually received £2,168.43 and a later payslip showed that figure without the deduction. The tribunal held that the first payslip was an error, that no deduction was made within the meaning of section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, and that both claims were not well founded and were dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | First alleged deduction: the Claimant said he was underpaid for 1 to 7 December 2021 in his 10 December 2021 payment. The tribunal found the contract provided for monthly payment on or around the 10th covering the previous period from the 10th of the prior month to the 9th of the month, so no deduction occurred. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Second alleged deduction: the Claimant relied on an initial payslip showing a £248.36 deduction described as 'leave'. The tribunal found that payslip was in error, that the correct net pay was £2,168.43, and that no deduction was actually made because the Claimant was no longer employed on 8 and 9 December 2021. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 13 Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.13(3) Employment Rights Act 1996
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.