Case 2601863/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Andrew Tysoe v Lincs Recycling and 1 other — 2025
- Case reference
- 2601863/2024
- Decision date
- 6 March 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hutchinson
- Venue
- Lincoln Heard
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr Andrew Tysoe
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the attended hearing before Employment Judge Hutchinson, sitting alone at Lincoln Heard on 13 January 2025, the tribunal gave an oral judgment recorded in writing on 28 January 2025. It found that the Respondent had made an unlawful deduction from the Claimant's wages and ordered payment of £4,118.40 gross.
The tribunal also found that the Claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded £457.60. It further found that the Respondent had failed to pay the Claimant his holiday entitlement and ordered a further £457.60. The total amount payable by the Respondent was £5,033.60.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £4,118 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the Claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded notice pay compensation. | Upheld | — | £458 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the Respondent had failed to pay the Claimant his holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £458 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,034
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.