Case 2502070/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr T Storey v Combined Utilities (Hartlepool) Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 2502070/2023
- Decision date
- 10 January 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Arullendran Representation
- Venue
- Newcastle CFCTC
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr T Storey
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting remotely at Newcastle CFCTC on 10 January 2024 before Employment Judge Arullendran, found that Combined Utilities (Hartlepool) Limited had made an unauthorised deduction from Mr T Storey’s wages in the period 3 July 2023 to 4 August 2023. That complaint was held to be well-founded, and the tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £3,520.53, described as the gross sum deducted.
The tribunal also held that the complaint of breach of contract concerning non-payment of expenses was well-founded. It awarded Mr Storey £120 for fuel expenses incurred during his employment. The total award was £3,640.53. The judgment records that the claimant was responsible for any tax or national insurance on the wage deduction award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from wages for the period 3 July 2023 to 4 August 2023 and ordered payment of the gross sum deducted. | Upheld | — | £3,521 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found breach of contract in relation to non-payment of expenses and awarded £120 for fuel expenses incurred during employment. | Upheld | — | £120 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,641
- 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.