Case 2501193/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Matthews v Tees Valley Community Asset Preservation Trust — 2022
- Case reference
- 2501193/2020
- Decision date
- 15 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Aspden REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Matthews
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal upheld Mr S Matthews' complaint of unlawful deductions from wages to the extent that the respondent had paid him for 7.5 hours per weekend shift worked instead of 8.5 hours. It ordered the respondent to pay the amount owing of £61.62 for that underpayment.
The tribunal also found that, when the proceedings began, the respondent was in breach of its duty under section 1(1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 to give a statement of employment particulars. It made an award under section 38 of the Employment Act 2002 in the sum of 2 weeks' pay, but the judgment did not fix the cash amount in the written decision and instead directed the parties to make submissions on the calculation.
The tribunal rejected Mr S Matthews' broader unlawful deduction allegations based on an asserted contractual entitlement to be paid until 6pm rather than 5.30pm. It also rejected the complaints in respect of holiday pay.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found that Mr S Matthews had been underpaid for weekend shifts because he was paid for 7.5 hours instead of 8.5 hours per shift. | Upheld | — | £62 |
| Other | The tribunal found that, when the proceedings began, the respondent was in breach of its duty under section 1(1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 to give a statement of employment particulars. It ordered an award under section 38 of the Employment Act 2002 in the sum of 2 weeks' pay, but the amount was left to be calculated after further submissions. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal rejected the broader unlawful deduction allegation based on the contention that the express contract terms entitled Mr S Matthews to be paid until 6pm rather than 5.30pm. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal rejected the holiday pay complaints. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.