Case 3331854/2018 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Respondent — 2019
- Case reference
- 3331854/2018
- Decision date
- 3 April 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Henry Appearances
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant presented a claim for unlawful deduction from wages after saying the respondent had not paid the increased hourly rate said to be due after 12 weeks of employment. The tribunal granted an amendment to extend the wage claim to 28 December 2018. The claimant gave oral evidence and produced a tabular breakdown of hours and payments received together with payslips; the respondent did not enter an appearance.
The tribunal found that the claimant began work on 16 February 2018 and that, under her contract of engagement, her rate was to increase to £11.48 per hour from 11 May 2018. It was not disputed that she continued to be paid £10.66 per hour instead. The respondent accepted there had been an error in the rate specified and offered an alternative assignment at the higher rate, which the claimant did not accept.
Applying section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, the tribunal held that the claimant had not been paid the wages properly payable to her and had not otherwise signified in writing any agreement to the lower rate. It therefore found that there had been an unlawful deduction from wages. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay the difference between £10.66 and £11.48 per hour for the period 11 May 2018 to 28 December 2018, quantified as £1,018.82 gross before tax and National Insurance deductions.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal ordered payment of £1,018.82 gross, subject to deduction of tax and National Insurance. | Upheld | — | £1,019 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,019
- across all upheld claims
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.
- 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.