Case 3327682/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr John Duckworth v Shield Labour Solutions Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 3327682/2019
- Decision date
- 12 January 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ord Appearances
- Venue
- Cambridge
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr John Duckworth
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr John Duckworth brought a claim for unlawful deductions from wages against Shield Labour Solutions Limited. The tribunal found that the respondent had made deductions under the headings 'HMRC Payment', 'Pension', and 'Company Margin' without contractual or statutory authority, and that the claimant had not agreed to them in writing. It also found that the unexplained £212.00 'B/Fwd' deduction shown on the second pay slip for week ending 4 August 2019 was not explained and was not authorised.
The tribunal relied on section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. It accepted the claimant's evidence that he did not understand the deductions and found no clause in the contract permitting the deductions. The respondent did not attend the hearing, and the only explanation provided in advance was a general assertion that all deductions were lawful and contractual. The tribunal rejected that explanation on the face of the pay slips and contract documents.
The unlawful deductions identified on the pay slips totalled £938.68, and the additional £212.00 'B/Fwd' deduction brought the total unlawful deductions to £1,150.68. Judgment was therefore entered for the claimant in that sum.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found unlawful deductions in respect of the weekly 'Company Deductions' entries, including 'HMRC Payment', 'Pension', 'Company Margin', and the unexplained 'B/Fwd' deduction of £212.00. | Upheld | — | £1,151 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,151
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.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.