Case 6009047/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S McEvoy v National Earthmoving Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6009047/2025
- Decision date
- 14 May 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Broughton
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S McEvoy
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent failed to present a valid response on time. Employment Judge Broughton decided that the claim, or part of it, could properly be determined under rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure.
The tribunal found that the respondent made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and breached his contract by deducting monies from wages ostensibly for pension contributions that were never paid into a pension scheme. The respondent was ordered to pay the claimant £1,947.00, and the hearing listed for 11 July was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that the respondent made unauthorised and/or unlawful deductions from the claimant's wages in respect of monies deducted ostensibly for pension contributions. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment states that the respondent breached the claimant's contract by deducting monies from wages ostensibly for pension contributions which were never paid into a pension scheme. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,947
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.