Case 2401661/2021 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Mr David Rowell - Director — 2021
- Case reference
- 2401661/2021
- Decision date
- 25 June 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard by Employment Judge A M Buchanan sitting alone at Manchester by CVP on 16 June 2021. The claimant, Mr Paul Roche, appeared in person and the respondent was represented by Mr David Rowell, Director. The tribunal amended the respondent's name to David Rowell Limited.
The tribunal held that the claim of unauthorised deduction from wages was well-founded. It found that a previously paid bonus had been deducted by the respondent from the claimant's final wages, and ordered the respondent to pay £200 forthwith. The award was stated to be a gross payment, with the claimant responsible for any income tax and employee national insurance contributions due on receipt.
The judgment also states that all other claims were dismissed. No separate reasons were given in the written record because reasons had been given orally at the hearing, and written reasons would only be provided if requested within 14 days. The attached interest notice records the statutory 8% interest rate and the relevant decision day as 25 June 2021, but it does not add any separate tribunal award beyond the £200 payment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the claim of unauthorised deduction from wages well-founded and ordered payment of £200 gross in respect of a previously paid bonus deducted from the claimant's final wages. | Upheld | — | £200 |
| Breach of contract | The judgment states that all other claims were dismissed; this dismissed claim is inferred from the case listing and the judgment's wording. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £200
- 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.