Case 2409128/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Percival v Dutton Contractors Limited (in administration) and 1 other — 2024
- Case reference
- 2409128/2023
- Decision date
- 27 September 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ainscough Representation
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr J Percival
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that Mr J Percival was an agency worker within the meaning of regulation 3 of the Agency Worker Regulations 2010. It also found that Quicksteps Contracting Services Limited was a temporary work agency within the meaning of regulation 4 of those Regulations and that it was the claimant’s employer. Dutton Contractors Limited was found not to be the claimant’s employer and was dismissed from the proceedings.
The claimant succeeded only on the unlawful deduction from wages claim. The tribunal ordered the second respondent to pay gross pay of £160.
The remaining claims were dismissed. Those were the claim for a protective award under section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, the unfair dismissal claim under section 111 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, the redundancy payment claim under section 163 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, the claim for compensation related to entitlement to leave on termination of employment under regulation 30 of the Working Time Regulations 1998, and the breach of contract claim.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal ordered the second respondent to pay the claimant gross pay of £160. | Upheld | — | £160 |
| Other | Protective award claim under section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Claim brought under section 111 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Redundancy | Claim brought under section 163 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Working time regulations | Claim for compensation related to entitlement to leave on termination of employment under regulation 30 of the Working Time Regulations 1998. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £160
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
6 references- regulation 3 of the Agency Worker Regulations 2010
- regulation 4 of the Agency Worker Regulations 2010
- section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- section 111 of the Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 163 of the Employment Rights Act 1996
- regulation 30 of the Working Time Regulations 1998
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.