Case 4101071/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Wallis v Selman Marine Design Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 4101071/2025
- Decision date
- 15 July 2025
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge F Eccles
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Wallis
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningNo response was presented to the claim, so the Employment Judge issued judgment on the available material under rule 22 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024. The tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant’s wages.
The deduction was identified as covering March, April and May 2025, at £2,781.88 per month, giving a principal award of £8,345.64. The judgment also records that the claimant was entitled to claim lost interest under section 24(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
The respondent was ordered to pay £17.37 in respect of lost interest. The total sum recorded by the judgment is £8,363.01.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | No response was presented. The Employment Judge issued judgment on the available material under rule 22 and found an unauthorised deduction from wages for March, April and May 2025 at £2,781.88 per month. | Upheld | — | £8,346 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £8,363
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 22 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
- Section 24(2) of the 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.