Case 2402001/2023 · Employment Tribunal
A Torr v TTS Contract Services Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 2402001/2023
- Decision date
- 24 July 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Batten REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
A Torr
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Manchester on 14 July 2023, Employment Judge Batten upheld the claimant's claim that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from wages. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay the claimant £360.00 gross in respect of those deductions.
The tribunal also found that the respondent had failed to provide the claimant with a written statement of particulars of employment pursuant to section 1 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. For that failure, the tribunal ordered the respondent to pay two weeks' pay, quantified at £1,200.00, from which no deductions were to be made.
The written record sent to the parties on 24 July 2023 included the standard interest notice under article 12 of the Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990. It stated that interest would be payable if sums awarded were not paid within 14 days of the relevant decision day, but the judgment itself did not quantify a separate interest award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of the gross sum of £360.00. | Upheld | — | £360 |
| Other | The tribunal awarded two weeks' pay, £1,200.00, for the respondent's failure to provide a written statement of particulars of employment under section 1 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Upheld | — | £1,200 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,560
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
3 references- s.1 Employment Rights Act 1996
- Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990 article 12
- s.17 Judgments Act 1838
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.