Case 4105211/2017 · Employment Tribunal
(sitting alone)5 John Wright v Represented by:- In Person Tradestart Recruitment Limited — 2018
- Case reference
- 4105211/2017
- Decision date
- 7 June 2018
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Michelle Sutherland
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
(sitting alone)5 John Wright
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, John Wright, pursued a claim for unlawful deduction from wages arising from pipefitting work at Levenseat in May 2017. The tribunal recorded that the respondent was a recruitment agency supplying labour to Roltech Engineering Limited and that the claimant was directed to supply his labour through Cinch Contracting Services Limited as an intermediary. The claimant started work on 12 May 2017 and, on 17 May 2017, entered into a contract of employment with Cinch. The tribunal found that the contract was consistent with the relationship between the parties and that it was not necessary to find a contractual relationship between the claimant and Tradestart Recruitment Limited.
The tribunal accepted that the claimant had worked the hours claimed on 12 and 13 May 2017 and that Cinch paid him £593.09 on or about 19 May 2017, with further part payments of £250 and £200 on 9 and 16 June 2017 respectively. It held that the employer in respect of the alleged unlawful deductions was Cinch Contracting Services Limited and not the respondent named in the claim. Applying Selkent Bus Co Ltd v Moore, the tribunal granted the claimant's application to substitute Cinch as respondent, refused the alternative application to add Cinch, and noted that the decision was reached in Cinch's absence with a right to seek reconsideration under Rule 71.
The tribunal did not finally resolve whether there had been unlawful deductions or whether the claim had been presented in time. It explained the operation of section 23 ERA 1996 and the early conciliation extension under section 207B, noted that the claim was lodged on 15 October 2017, and identified competing dates depending on whether 2 June 2017 or 16 June 2017 was treated as the last deduction in a series. The judgment therefore ordered a one-day continued final hearing to determine the outstanding issues, including limitation and the hours worked by the claimant under the Cinch contract in the period 15 May to 25 May inclusive.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | At this hearing the tribunal did not determine the substantive unlawful deduction from wages claim. It found that Cinch Contracting Services Limited, not Tradestart Recruitment Limited, was the employer for the relevant deductions issue, granted substitution of Cinch as respondent, refused the alternative request merely to add Cinch, and ordered a continued final hearing to determine the outstanding issues including time limit and hours worked. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
6 references- s.13 ERA 1996
- s.23 ERA 1996
- s.207B(3) ERA 1996
- s.207B(4) ERA 1996
- Selkent Bus Co Ltd v Moore [1996] IRLR 661
- Blakely v On-site Recruitment Solutions Ltd & Heritage Solutions Limited UKEAT/0134/17
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.