Case 6019723/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Clarke v Springfield Training Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6019723/2025
- Decision date
- 4 July 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Deeley
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Clarke
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent failed to present a valid response on time. The Employment Judge decided that a determination could properly be made under rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure.
The Tribunal declared that the respondent made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and awarded the claimant gross outstanding contractual bonus payments of £6772.42. It also found that the respondent breached an implied term of the claimant's contract by deducting employee pension contributions from wages but not paying them into the pension, and ordered payment of £2372.31.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The Tribunal declared that the respondent made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and awarded the gross amount for outstanding contractual bonus payments. | Upheld | — | £6,772 |
| Breach of contract | The Tribunal found breach of an implied contract term by deducting employee pension contributions from wages but not paying them into the pension. | Upheld | — | £2,372 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £9,145
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.