Case 6003225/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr HS Lam v LC Leeds Bike Shop Limited (in creditors voluntary liquidation) and 1 other — 2025
- Case reference
- 6003225/2024
- Decision date
- 13 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge T Knowles Representation
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr HS Lam
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that the Claimant's claim for wages for December 2023 and January 2024 had been presented outside the time limit, but that it was not reasonably practicable for him to bring the claim in time and that he brought it within a reasonable period thereafter. Time was extended for that claim.
The complaint of unauthorised deduction from wages was found well-founded. The First Respondent was ordered to pay the Claimant £1,441.44 as the gross sum deducted, with the Claimant responsible for any tax or national insurance.
The tribunal dismissed the Claimant's claims for financial losses relating to late payments of wages in 2022 because they were brought outside the time limit and time was not extended. It also determined that the Claimant was entitled to a redundancy payment of £411.84 under section 163 Employment Rights Act 1996.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claim for wages for December 2023 and January 2024 was presented outside the time limit, but time was extended because it was not reasonably practicable to bring it in time and it was brought within a reasonable period thereafter. | Upheld | — | £1,441 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claims for financial losses relating to late payments of wages in 2022 were brought outside the time limit and the tribunal refused to extend time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Redundancy | The tribunal determined under section 163 Employment Rights Act 1996 that the Claimant was entitled to a redundancy payment. | Upheld | — | £412 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,853
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- reasonably practicable
- section 163 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.