Mr M Hanson v SAS Software Limited — 2021

Mr Hanson brought a claim for unlawful deduction from wages arising from non-payment of commission under the 2019 Sales Compensation Plan. He said he had generated commission of about £801,584, had been paid £300,412, and claimed the shortfall of £501,583.74. SAS Software Ltd relied on clause 6(h) of the Plan, which stated that any payout over 300% of On Target Variable Pay was subject to review and approval by the Executive Vice President and Chief Sales Officer.

The tribunal held that clause 6(h) was a clear contractual limit and that it was not necessary for the respondent to show any irregularity, fairness issue, or other reasonableness test before applying it. On the claimant's own pleaded case, there was no agreement varying the compensation documents so as to disapply the clause, and the tribunal rejected the argument that the respondent's communications in February 2020 amounted to binding approval of a higher entitlement.

The tribunal also rejected the alternative case based on the proposed £100,000 payment linked to MBO tasks. It held that this was not pleaded as a separate claim, that the claimant had not accepted the proposal, and that he could not both reject the offer and then claim it as money contractually due. The tribunal further held that the implied-term argument based on irrationality or perversity did not raise a prima facie case on the facts pleaded, including the limited and equivocal comparator evidence relied on by the claimant. The unlawful deduction from wages claim was therefore struck out under rule 37(1) as having no reasonable prospects of success.