Case 6001396/2025 · Employment Tribunal
S McCutcheon v Crucial Solutions (NE) Limited (In voluntary liquidation) — 2025
- Case reference
- 6001396/2025
- Decision date
- 19 May 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge G Duncan Representation
- Venue
- Newcastle via video
Parties
2 namedClaimant
S McCutcheon
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge G Duncan, sitting at Newcastle via video on 19 May 2025, recorded that the respondent did not attend. The tribunal found that Crucial Solutions (NE) Limited (in voluntary liquidation) had made an unlawful deduction from the claimant’s wages and ordered payment of the gross sum of £3,025.98.
The tribunal also found that the claimant had been unfairly dismissed. On that claim it ordered a basic award of £2,419.95 and a compensatory award of £5,333.40. The judgment also states that the claimant is responsible for any income tax or employee national insurance contributions that may be due on the unpaid wages award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal ordered payment of the gross sum. It also stated that the claimant is responsible for any income tax or employee national insurance contributions due on the unpaid wages award. | Upheld | — | £3,026 |
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal awarded a basic award of £2,419.95 and a compensatory award of £5,333.40. | Upheld | — | £7,753 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £10,779
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £2,420
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £5,333
- compensatory remedy recorded
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.