Case 6004700/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr L Adams v C Thompson & Son Transport Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 6004700/2025
- Decision date
- 25 July 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Leith Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr L Adams
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Leith at Cardiff (by video) on 25 July 2025 heard the claim of Mr L Adams against C Thompson & Son Transport Ltd, with the claimant in person and Ms Lunney (Solicitor) for the respondent.
The Tribunal found unauthorised deductions from wages between July 2024 and February 2025 totalling £8,623.85 net plus £104 gross. The respondent had also breached the claimant's contract and was ordered to pay damages of £32.80. The respondent had failed to provide itemised payslips within the timescale in section 8(1) Employment Rights Act 1996, but no award was made in respect of that failure.
The complaints of wrongful dismissal and failure to pay accrued but untaken annual leave failed and were dismissed. Reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unauthorised deductions July 2024 to February 2025: £8,623.85 net plus £104 gross. | Upheld | — | £8,728 |
| Breach of contract | Damages for breach of contract. | Upheld | — | £33 |
| Other | Failure to provide itemised payslips within section 8(1) Employment Rights Act 1996; no award made. | Upheld | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | Wrongful dismissal complaint failed and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Failure to pay accrued but untaken annual leave complaint failed and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £8,761
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 8(1) 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.