Case 2501237/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr T Atherton v Scott Michael Steele — 2020
- Case reference
- 2501237/2020
- Decision date
- 8 October 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Johnson JUDGMENT
- Venue
- Newcastle Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr T Atherton
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Johnson determined the case on 23 September 2020 under Rule 21. The claimant, Mr T Atherton, succeeded on his complaint of unauthorised deduction from wages. The tribunal found that complaint well-founded and ordered Scott Michael Steele to pay £3,930.90 net, with responsibility for any income tax and national insurance contributions falling on the respondent.
The claimant also succeeded on his complaint of failure to pay accrued holiday pay. That claim was also found well-founded, and the respondent was ordered to pay £290.06 net on the same tax treatment. The judgment does not record any separate findings on liability beyond those two claims, and it does not identify any additional remedy components beyond the two net sums awarded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the complaint of unauthorised deduction from wages well-founded and ordered payment of £3,930.90 net, with the respondent responsible for income tax and national insurance contributions. | Upheld | — | £3,931 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the complaint of failure to pay accrued holiday pay well-founded and ordered payment of £290.06 net, with the respondent responsible for income tax and national insurance contributions. | Upheld | — | £290 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,221
- 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.