Case 3312001/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Princewill Nwabeke v Catalyst Recruitment Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 3312001/2022
- Decision date
- 30 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tuck KC
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Princewill Nwabeke
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Princewill Nwabeke worked as an HGV driver for Catalyst Recruitment Ltd from 11 July 2022 to 31 July 2022 and was supplied to Blackline Transport Ltd. He completed and signed induction documents, including an agency driver requirements document stating, in block capitals, that if premium diesel was used, the difference would be passed on to him.
The respondent said the claimant used premium diesel on 29 and 30 July 2022, and that the difference between standard and premium fuel amounted to £89.40. The tribunal accepted that the claimant had not had a face-to-face induction, but held that the written contractual terms clearly authorised the deduction. Applying section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, the tribunal concluded that the deduction from wages was authorised and dismissed the unlawful deductions claim. The separate £60 parking fine was noted, but the respondent did not deduct that amount.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claim concerned a deduction of £89.40 from final pay for premium diesel used on 29 and 30 July 2022. The tribunal found the deduction was authorised by the contractual terms accepted during induction. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Section 13 Employment Rights Act 1996
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.