Case 6023330/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms E McCarroll v Mr R Jones t/a RGSR Farms — 2025
- Case reference
- 6023330/2024
- Decision date
- 4 August 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brace REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms E McCarroll
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs E McCarroll presented her claim on 10 March 2025 and the respondent did not present a valid response on time. The tribunal proceeded in the absence of both parties at a CVP hearing on 31 July 2025 and determined the claims on the available information. It extended time for the unauthorised deduction and written itemised pay statement complaints because it was not reasonably practicable to present them within the ordinary time limit and they were brought within a further reasonable period.
The complaint of unauthorised deduction from wages failed. The tribunal held that pension contributions paid by the employer to the pension provider on the worker's behalf do not fall within the definition of 'wages' for the purposes of the Employment Rights Act 1996, so the tribunal had no jurisdiction to consider that complaint.
The tribunal upheld the redundancy payment claim under section 163 Employment Rights Act 1996 and found the claimant entitled to £1,558.48. It also ordered a further £1,558.48 to compensate for financial loss attributable to the failure to pay the redundancy payment. In relation to the written itemised pay statement complaint, the tribunal found a failure to provide the required statements under section 8 Employment Rights Act 1996. Separately, it found the respondent was in breach of the duty to provide a written statement of employment particulars and, applying section 38 Employment Act 2002, awarded £389.62, stating that two weeks' gross pay was appropriate and that four weeks' gross pay was not just and equitable.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal held that employer pension contributions paid to the pension provider on the worker's behalf are not 'wages' under the Employment Rights Act 1996 and that it had no jurisdiction to consider the complaint. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was entitled to a redundancy payment of £1,558.48 under section 163 Employment Rights Act 1996 and ordered a further £1,558.48 for financial loss attributable to non-payment of that redundancy payment. | Upheld | — | £3,117 |
| Other | The tribunal found the respondent failed to give the claimant written itemised pay statements required by section 8 Employment Rights Act 1996. No separate monetary award was stated for this complaint. | Upheld | — | — |
| Other | The tribunal found the respondent was in breach of the duty to provide a written statement of employment particulars and awarded £389.62 under section 38 Employment Act 2002, reflecting two weeks' gross pay. | Upheld | — | £390 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,507
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £3,117
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
5 references- not reasonably practicable
- further reasonable period
- section 163 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 8 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 38 Employment Act 2002
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.