Case 3303849/2019 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Mr Callum Gale, Ops Director — 2019
- Case reference
- 3303849/2019
- Decision date
- 5 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Alliott Appearances
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Chris Staton brought a claim for unauthorised deductions from wages against JG Environmental Limited. The respondent accepted the correct name of the employer and the tribunal considered four heads of deduction in turn. The judge found that the claim succeeded overall and entered judgment for the claimant in the gross sum of £488.00, subject to tax and National Insurance.
The first successful head was an £18.00 return fee. The claimant said he had not received an email telling him to collect stock, but was later charged the return fee when the stock was not picked up. The tribunal accepted that evidence and held that, because he had not been informed that he needed to collect the stock, the respondent was not entitled to make the deduction.
The second successful head was a £130.00 parking ticket deduction. The claimant said he had been sent to work in Belsize Park, had been told in advance there was free parking, then was told by his manager Roy to park on the road and that the customer would pay any penalty charge. The tribunal accepted the claimant as an honest witness and found that the respondent was not entitled to deduct the parking ticket sum in those circumstances.
The third successful head was £340.00 in commission or bonuses earned in September 2018. The tribunal considered the respondent's clause saying commission would only be paid if the employee was active on the payroll, but found the clause ambiguous and not clear enough to deprive the claimant of commission already earned before his employment ended on 15 October 2018. The tribunal referred to Brand v Compro Computer Services Limited in support of that approach.
The final head, holiday entitlement, failed. The claimant accepted that his holiday entitlement as at 15 October 2018 would have been 22.09 days and that he had in fact taken 22.5 days. On that basis the tribunal held there was no accrued holiday entitlement outstanding at dismissal, so no deduction arose from that head.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal upheld three heads of the wage deduction claim: an £18 return fee, a £130 parking ticket deduction, and £340 commission not paid after employment ended. The holiday entitlement element failed because the claimant accepted that as of 15 October 2018 he had 22.09 days' entitlement and had taken 22.5 days, so nothing remained outstanding. | Upheld | — | £488 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £488
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Brand v Compro Computer Services Limited [2005] IRLR 196 (CA)
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.