Case 6003868/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Lowe v Affordable Window Systems Ltd HELD AT: Manchester (in person) — 2025
- Case reference
- 6003868/2024
- Decision date
- 14 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Slater REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Lowe
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting at Manchester before Employment Judge Slater on 9 January 2025, dealt with complaints of unauthorised deductions from wages. It found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction by failing to pay the claimant wages for the period 15 May to 7 June 2024.
The judgment records that the claimant agreed the respondent had since paid the amount due. For that reason, the tribunal made no order for payment in respect of that successful complaint.
The tribunal also found that the complaints of unauthorised deductions from wages for the period 9 February to 14 May 2024 were not well founded and dismissed them.
Claims and outcomes
2 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 tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from wages for the period 15 May to 7 June 2024, but the claimant agreed the respondent had since paid the amount due, so no order for payment was made. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The complaints of unauthorised deductions from wages for the period 9 February to 14 May 2024 were found not well founded and were dismissed. | 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.