Case 4100599/2017 · Employment Tribunal
ETZ 4(WR) IN THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL (SCOTLAND) AT EDINBURGH Judgment of the Employment Tribunal in Case No: S/4100599/2017 Heard at Edinburgh on June 20175 Employment Judge: J G d’Inverno, QVRM, TD, VR, WS (Sitting Alone) Jacek Michalczyk v Allander Security Limited — 2017
- Case reference
- 4100599/2017
- Decision date
- 26 June 2017
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Joseph
- Venue
- Edinburgh
Parties
2 namedClaimant
ETZ 4(WR) IN THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL (SCOTLAND) AT EDINBURGH Judgment of the Employment Tribunal in Case No: S/4100599/2017 Heard at Edinburgh on June 20175 Employment Judge: J G d’Inverno, QVRM, TD, VR, WS (Sitting Alone) Jacek Michalczyk
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal held that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant’s wages contrary to section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The deduction was found to relate to 42 hours of holiday pay due to the claimant as at 31 December 2016, and the claim succeeded.
On remedy, the judgment ordered the respondent to pay the claimant £215.35 and an additional £390 by way of reimbursement of the issue and hearing fees incurred by the claimant. The extracted text states £215 in the first limb and £215.35 in the payment order, so there is a minor discrepancy in the text, but the operative order is clear.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The first limb of the judgment states an unauthorised deduction of £215 in respect of 42 hours holiday pay due on 31 December 2016, while the operative payment order states £215.35; the remedy amount follows the order. | Upheld | — | £215 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £605
- 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.
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.