Case 3331215/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr W Mather v Vision Security Group Limited t/a VSG — 2020
- Case reference
- 3331215/2018
- Decision date
- 31 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Benson Representation
- Venue
- Liverpool
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr W Mather
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was heard at Liverpool on 18, 19, 20 and 21 February 2020 before Employment Judge Benson, with the claimant appearing in person and the respondent represented by counsel. The written judgment record states that the unfair dismissal claim failed and was dismissed.
The tribunal also found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant’s wages. No monetary remedy was set out in this decision record, and the matter was to be listed for remedy. The record notes that the reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in time.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant’s wages. The matter was listed for a remedy hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.