Case 4123260/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Hameed, Trade Union Rep For the v Mr French-Williams, Solicitor — 2020
- Case reference
- 4123260/2018
- Decision date
- 7 May 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Skehan Appearances
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Hameed, Trade Union Rep For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that LHR Airports Limited had made an unauthorised deduction from Mr R Khan’s wages contrary to section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The deduction related to various shifts in September 2018 that the respondent treated as unpaid.
The written record notes that the hearing on 15 July 2019 was before Employment Judge Skehan at Watford, with Mr Hameed appearing for the claimant and Mr French-Williams for the respondent. The judgment records the liability finding only and states that the matter was listed for a remedy hearing at Watford Employment Tribunal on 7 May 2020 at 10am.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal held that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from wages contrary to section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, relating to various shifts in September 2018 treated as unpaid by the respondent. The matter was listed for a remedy hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.