Case 2410132/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Victor Thompson v SNSG Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 2410132/2022
- Decision date
- 1 November 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Fairhurst
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Victor Thompson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Manchester Employment Tribunal, Employment Judge Fairhurst sitting alone heard Mr Victor Thompson's claim against SNSG Limited by CVP on 16 October 2023. The tribunal found that the complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages contrary to Part II of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was well founded. It ordered the respondent to pay the claimant the gross sum of £39.60 deducted from pay.
The written record notes that reasons had been given orally at the hearing and that no written reasons would be provided unless requested in time. The judgment record does not identify any other claims, remedy components, or findings beyond the unlawful deductions award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages contrary to Part II of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was well founded and ordered repayment of the gross sum deducted from pay. No separate interest figure or split award was stated in the judgment. | Upheld | — | £40 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £40
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.