Case 3310839/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Kevin Okot-Ojok v Polycom (United Kingdom) Limited (in voluntary liquidation) — 2020
- Case reference
- 3310839/2019
- Decision date
- 22 April 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hawksworth
- Venue
- Reading
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Kevin Okot-Ojok
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Kevin Okot-Ojok brought a single claim for unauthorised deductions from wages arising from commission under Polycom (United Kingdom) Limited's sales incentive arrangements. The tribunal found that his employment contract provided for base salary plus incentive compensation, that the relevant plan was the 2018 Sales Incentive Plan, and that the claimant accepted the plan and the recovery of overpayments by email on 2 October 2018.
The tribunal held that the scheme was an annual target scheme, not a series of quarterly target schemes. The quarterly figures in Appendix A were a guide to progress towards the annual target of £3,000 pro-rated for 2018, and the monthly payments made before year-end were commission advances. On that basis, the respondent's year-end calculation of total commission for 2018 at £4,294 was accepted, reflecting performance at 143.13% of the annual target.
The tribunal also held that the non-recoverable draw payments of £600 in September and October 2018 were properly reconciled at the end of November 2018 against the commission advance then due, producing the November payment of £1,004. It rejected the claimant's case that those amounts were deducted twice, finding that there were two separate reconciliations: one at the end of the draw period and one at year end against total annual entitlement.
For January 2019, the tribunal found the claimant had left employment on 11 January 2019 and had been paid in lieu of notice. It held he was overpaid commission for 20 days of January, calculated at £483.87, because commission accrued day by day and the contract only entitled him to commission while still employed. The respondent was entitled to deduct that overpayment, and the final payment of £1,605.68 in February 2019 was the amount properly payable. The claim was therefore dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim concerned commission under the respondent's Annual Target Incentive scheme. The tribunal held the scheme was annual rather than quarterly, that the November reconciliation and year-end deduction of earlier commission advances were authorised by the scheme, and that the January 2019 overpayment was recoverable under the contract, the claimant's written acceptance, and s.14 ERA 1996. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
5 references- section 13 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 14 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 27 Employment Rights Act 1996
- Apportionment Act 1870
- Hartley and others v King Edward VI College [2017] IRLR 763
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.