Case 6005975/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr. A. Anastasiou v Fullers Family Law Ltd. Hearing: Final Hearing — 2024
- Case reference
- 6005975/2024
- Decision date
- 3 December 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tinnion Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr. A. Anastasiou
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr. A. Anastasiou’s claim concerned clause 11.1 of his employment contract with Fullers Family Law Ltd and whether the contractual bonus should be calculated by reference to the Respondent’s financial year, 1 April to 31 March, or by reference to the Claimant’s work anniversary, 12 December to 11 December. The Claimant said that if the financial-year period applied, he had earned a bonus of £9,607.86 for 1 April 2023 to 31 March 2024. The Respondent accepted that clause 11.1 created a contractual bonus scheme, but said the relevant reference period was the employment anniversary and that no bonus was due.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The Claimant alleged an unlawful deduction from wages under s.13 ERA 1996 for non-payment of a contractual bonus of £9,607.86 calculated by reference to 1 April 2023 to 31 March 2024. The Tribunal dismissed the claim and also held that any bonus payment due would have fallen due on or around 29 December 2023, so the claim was out of time. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Arnold v Britton
- civil balance of probabilities
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.