Case 4103521/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr E Kavira v Represented by: Ms E Campbell - Solicitor Lanarkshire Health Board — 2022
- Case reference
- 4103521/2022
- Decision date
- 18 November 2022
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Robison
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr E Kavira
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr E Kavira brought a single claim for unlawful deduction from wages arising from the respondent's decision to stop sick pay and recoup sums paid during what it treated as unauthorised absence. The tribunal accepted that the sickness absence policy formed part of the contract and that, for absences over seven days, medical certification had to be provided to the manager as soon as possible. It also recorded that the contract allowed absence to be treated as unauthorised, with no pay, if the policy was not followed.
The claimant went on holiday to Africa in November 2021, tested positive for covid on 3 December 2021, and remained in contact with his manager only intermittently. The respondent repeatedly asked for medical evidence and warned that pay would be withheld if no evidence was produced. The claimant eventually produced two medical reports in French, dated 22 December 2021, on 25 February 2022, and later a GP fit note on 4 March 2022. The tribunal found that he could have provided the medical evidence earlier, including by sending photographs while abroad or by obtaining and submitting evidence once back in the UK on 18 February 2022.
The tribunal rejected the claimant's case that the documents could not be obtained or sent sooner. It found that the medical reports were dated 22 December 2021 and that the claimant's explanation that they were not issued until the end of treatment was not plausible. It also considered the claimant's emails to be vague and not a direct response to the repeated requests for certification. On that basis, the tribunal held that he was in breach of contract by not supplying the medical information as soon as possible.
Applying section 13 ERA 1996, the tribunal held that the deductions were permitted by the contract and by the policy because the claimant had failed to comply with the certification requirements. It therefore found that the claim was not well-founded and dismissed it. No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The only claim was for unlawful deductions from wages in respect of contractual sick pay. The tribunal held that the claimant failed to submit medical evidence supporting his sickness absence 'as soon as possible' under the contractual attendance policy, so the respondent was entitled to stop pay and seek repayment of overpayments. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- section 13 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 13(3) Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 14(1)(a) Employment Rights Act 1996
- properly payable
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.