Case 8002331/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Richard King v Represented by: Ms K Brown - Solicitor Foodstore Ltd — 2026
- Case reference
- 8002331/2025
- Decision date
- 6 March 2026
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge O’Donnell
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Richard King
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the claim in the respondent's absence and from the claimant alone. It found that Mr Richard King was an employee of Foodstore Ltd despite also being a director and shareholder. In reaching that conclusion, the tribunal relied on the history of the business, the terms of the 30 August 2024 share purchase agreement, and the fact that the respondent had suspended the claimant and was seeking to follow a disciplinary process.
The tribunal found a clear deduction from wages within the meaning of the Employment Rights Act 1996. It accepted that the claimant's monthly salary was agreed to continue even though he was not carrying out duties, but that he was not paid from October 2024 onwards except for payments in August and September 2025. It also found that the monthly pension contribution of £500 was an emolument referable to employment and therefore fell within the statutory definition of wages, and that those contributions stopped in February 2025.
On the figures, the tribunal found that wages due from 31 October 2024 to the hearing date totalled £104,354.84, pension contributions totalled £8,500, and the August and September 2025 payments of £13,300.16 had to be deducted to avoid double counting. The tribunal therefore upheld the unlawful deduction from wages claim and ordered Foodstore Ltd to pay £112,854.84.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The award covered unpaid salary and unpaid pension contributions, with the August and September 2025 payments deducted to avoid double counting; the judgment did not split the award between separate heads of loss. | Upheld | — | £112,855 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £112,855
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
3 references- s.13 ERA 1996
- s.13(3) ERA 1996
- s.27 ERA 1996
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.