Case 6003810/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Jon Tucker v Electrical Testing Surveyors Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6003810/2025
- Decision date
- 30 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge K Richardson REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Jon Tucker
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningJon Tucker brought a complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages against Electrical Testing Surveyors Limited. The matter was heard at Southampton by CVP on 10 October 2025 before Employment Judge K Richardson, with the claimant appearing in person and the respondent represented by a litigation assistant.
The Tribunal held that the complaint was not well-founded and dismissed it. The judgment record does not set out the tribunal's oral reasons beyond stating that reasons were given orally at the hearing.
No monetary award was recorded. The written record also states that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in time, so the extracted text contains only the formal dismissal outcome.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The Tribunal found that the complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages was not well-founded and dismissed it. Reasons were given orally at the hearing; the written record does not include written reasons. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.