Case 2501827/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr K D J Swinbourn v P&K Damp Proofing and Home Improvements Ltd Heard: Remotely by video — 2022
- Case reference
- 2501827/2021
- Decision date
- 25 February 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Shore Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr K D J Swinbourn
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that Mr K D J Swinbourn's claims for unauthorised deduction of wages and breach of contract were well-founded and succeeded. The case was heard remotely by video on 25 February 2022 before Employment Judge S Shore, with the claimant appearing in person and no appearance by the respondent.
For the breach of contract claim, brought contrary to Article 4 of the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England & Wales) Order 1994, the tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £304.16. The judgment states that this sum was payable without deduction of income tax or National Insurance.
For the unlawful deduction of wages claim under section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, the tribunal ordered payment of £4,324.80. The judgment states that this figure was calculated after deduction of income tax and National Insurance. The Employment Protection (Recoupment of Jobseeker's Allowance and Income Support) Regulations 1996 were stated not to apply to any award in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Claim succeeded under Article 4 of the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England & Wales) Order 1994. The tribunal ordered payment of £304.16 with no deduction of income tax or National Insurance. | Upheld | — | £304 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim succeeded under section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The tribunal ordered payment of £4,324.80, calculated after deduction of income tax and National Insurance. | Upheld | — | £4,325 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,629
- 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.