Case 3309756/2022 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Adrian Green (Solicitor) — 2023
- Case reference
- 3309756/2022
- Decision date
- 25 August 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Venue
- Bury St Edmunds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningDaniel Donnelly's breach of contract claims against Willowserve Ltd, one concerning a bonus and the other concerning a payment for vehicle insurance and tax, were dismissed. The judgment records the dismissal but does not set out written reasons, noting that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested.
The tribunal upheld the claim for unlawful deduction of wages and made a declaration to that effect. The award was itemised as £1,515.12 for pay in lieu of accrued untaken holiday, £637.50 for a wage deduction in October 2021, £682.75 for overtime deductions for February and March 2022, and £1,092.15 for wages deducted for April 2022, making a total payable of £3,927.52.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Breach of contract claim in respect of a bonus; dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Breach of contract claim in respect of a payment for vehicle insurance and tax; dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Successful unlawful deduction of wages claim. The award comprised £1,515.12 for pay in lieu of accrued untaken holiday, £637.50 for wages deducted for October 2021, £682.75 for overtime deducted for February and March 2022, and £1,092.15 for wages deducted for April 2022. | Upheld | — | £3,928 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,928
- 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.