Case 6018173/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Darren Leadbeater v West End Galleries Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 6018173/2025
- Decision date
- 3 November 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Moyler REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Darren Leadbeater
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal found the complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages well-founded. It held that the respondent made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's net wages in the period 23 December 2024 to 25 January 2025, and ordered payment of the net sum deducted.
The Tribunal also found the holiday pay complaint well-founded. It held that the respondent failed to pay the claimant in accordance with regulation 14(2) of the Working Time Regulations 1998, and awarded a sum for 7 days' accrued but untaken statutory annual leave.
The breach of contract claim in respect of unpaid pension contributions was dismissed upon withdrawal.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages well-founded for net wages deducted in the period 23 December 2024 to 25 January 2025. | Upheld | — | £2,895 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the holiday pay complaint well-founded under regulation 14(2) of the Working Time Regulations 1998 for 7 days' accrued but untaken statutory annual leave. | Upheld | — | £753 |
| Breach of contract | The breach of contract claim in respect of unpaid pension contributions was dismissed upon withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,648
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- regulation 14(2) of the Working Time Regulations 1998
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.