Case 4113120/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr W Sutherland v Clyde Homes Ltd — 2018
- Case reference
- 4113120/2018
- Decision date
- 4 December 2018
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Laura Doherty
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr W Sutherland
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr W Sutherland worked for Clyde Homes from 12 March 2018 as a joiner at an hourly rate of £16. He was paid every two weeks by bank transfer, completed weekly timesheets, and regularly asked for pay statements, but none were provided. He also wrote to the respondent on 19 June 2018 asking for pay slips and received no reply. The tribunal explained that it had no jurisdiction over the P45 issue raised in the claim, but that it could determine the section 8 and section 12 Employment Rights Act 1996 matters.
The tribunal found, on the claimant’s evidence and documents, that Clyde Homes had failed to provide an itemised pay statement as required by section 8 ERA 1996 and made a declaration under section 12(3) to that effect. It also accepted the claimant’s evidence that in the 13 weeks before the application his gross pay, calculated from hours worked at £16 per hour, was £8,632 and that he had actually received £7,455.37 net, so that £1,176.63 had been deducted without notification. Under section 12(4) ERA 1996, the tribunal ordered the respondent to pay that sum to the claimant.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The tribunal made a declaration under section 12(3) ERA 1996 that the respondent had failed to provide itemised pay statements required by section 8 ERA 1996. No monetary award was attached to this claim. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found unnotified deductions during the 13 weeks immediately before the application and ordered payment of the aggregate sum under section 12(4) ERA 1996. | Upheld | — | £1,177 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,177
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
5 references- Section 8 ERA 1996
- Section 11 ERA 1996
- Section 12(3) ERA 1996
- Section 12(4) ERA 1996
- Section 12(5) ERA 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.