How much compensation do unlawful deduction from wages claims award at an employment tribunal?

Across 15,206 UK unlawful deduction from wages tribunal cases with a recorded remedy since 2017, the median total award was £2,375 and the largest was £3,449,329.

What percentage of unlawful deduction from wages claims succeed at an employment tribunal?

Of 20,822 unlawful deduction from wages claims decided on the merits by UK tribunals, 76% were upheld.

Loading…

Top

Unlawful deduction from wages compensation & tribunal success rate — UK data (page 284) | Tribunal Watch

Claim pillar

Unlawful deduction from wages employment tribunal cases — UK data 2017–present

Name: Unlawful deduction from wages UK employment tribunal statistics
Creator: Tribunal Watch
License: https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/

Tribunal Watch has indexed 36,571 UK employment tribunal cases involving unlawful deduction from wages claims, published on gov.uk since 2017. Where compensation was recorded, the median award was £2,375 (the largest £3,449,329) across 15,206 cases. Tribunals upheld 76% of the 20,822 decided unlawful deduction from wages claims. These cases name 28,365 distinct employers as respondents.

Total cases: 36,571
Median award: £2,375
Claims upheld: 76%
Largest single award: £3,449,329
Distinct employers: 28,365
England & Wales: 31,989
Scotland: 4,582

Compensation in unlawful deduction from wages cases

15,206 cases with a recorded award

Median: £2,375
Mean: £6,842
25th percentile: £962
75th percentile: £6,304
90th percentile: £15,354
Largest: £3,449,329

Figures are the total award recorded across cases that include a unlawful deduction from wages claim and a published remedy — 15,206 of 36,571 unlawful deduction from wages cases. Many tribunal judgments decide liability only, with compensation set at a later hearing, so they are not counted here. A judgment combining several claim types contributes its whole award. Nothing here is legal advice or a prediction of any individual outcome.

Outcomes of unlawful deduction from wages claims

25,693 adjudicated claims

Outcome	Claims	Share
Upheld	15,817	62%
Dismissed	5,005	19%
Struck out	2,084	8%
Withdrawn	2,044	8%
Other	543	2%
Settled	200	1%

Counting only claims a tribunal decided on the merits (upheld or dismissed), 76% of unlawful deduction from wages claims were upheld — 15,817 of 20,822. Settled and withdrawn claims are excluded from that rate. Outcomes are recorded per claim, so a judgment can uphold one claim and dismiss another.

Unlawful deduction from wages cases per year

2017–2026

Year	Cases	Trend
2017	403
2018	672
2019	4,550
2020	6,663
2021	4,863
2022	4,993
2023	4,865
2024	4,282
2025	3,724
2026	1,556

Largest unlawful deduction from wages awards

Top 8 by total award

Case ref.	Decided	Claimant	Primary respondent	Total award
1404855/2018	5 June 2019	In person For the	University of Southampton	£3,449,329
1403379/2024	29 May 2025	Ms Herbert (in person) For the Second Claimant Ms Orimolade (in person) For the	Tech	£2,083,333
2202223/2019	5 November 2019	Mrs J Marsan	Big Marcel Ltd	£423,868
3304188/2022	28 July 2023	Cyril Gregory	Petro Trace Limited	£340,213
2204168/2021	23 June 2022	Elle Kim	Finablr Ltd	£279,566
3320831/2021	30 November 2022	Mr Joh Murphy	Remus Corporation UK Limited (in compulsory liquidation)	£234,410
3305627/2024	6 August 2025	Mr Richard Cooke	Seven Resourcing Limited	£229,119
2414266/2021	7 March 2022	Mrs N Denmade and others (see schedule)	Trinity Brands UK Ltd	£219,664

Top employers — unlawful deduction from wages cases

20 ranked by case count

#	Employer	Cases
01	Kent County Council,	177
02	Falkirk Council	151
03	Secretary of State for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy	135
04	DHL Services Limited	122
05	Royal Mail Group Limited	119
06	Midlothian Council	118
07	Clarity Products Limited	110
08	South Lanarkshire Council	104
09	Secretary of State for Business & Trade	90
10	The City of Edinburgh Council	87
11	Asda Stores Limited	77
12	Tesco Stores Ltd	68
13	Aberdeen City Council	63
14	Mitie Limited

All unlawful deduction from wages cases

36,571 cases · page 284 of 732 · chronological

Case ref.	Decided	Claimant	Primary respondent	Jurisdiction	Total award
4105558/2022	20 January 2023	EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4105558/2022 Held at Aberdeen on January 2023 Employment Judge N M Hosie Mrs N Sutherland	Hrafn Shetland Ltd	Scotland	£13,520
4112588/2014	20 January 2023	EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case Number: 4112588/2014 Mr E Crombie	Scottish Borders Council	Scotland	—
4103374/2018	20 January 2023	Mr M Cushley	Enigma Industrial Services Limited	Scotland	—
4116985/2014	20 January 2023	EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case Number: 4116985/2014 Ms M de Santus	The City of Edinburgh Council	Scotland	—
1402168/2022	20 January 2023	Harry Callan	Perrin & Son Construction Limited	England & Wales	£918
4108588/2014	20 January 2023	EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case Number: 4108588/2014 Mrs P Davidson	The City of Edinburgh Council	Scotland	—
1806689/2022	20 January 2023	Mr C Adoh	Hands-On Healthcare Recruitment Ltd (in voluntary liquidation)

Methodology

Cases on this page are identified by first-pass extraction against the locked §4.4 claim-type taxonomy — a judgment enters the unlawful deduction from wages caseload if unlawful deduction from wagesis tagged in its classification output. A single judgment frequently combines multiple claim types, so the same case may appear on more than one claim-type page. Per-claim outcomes come from the second-pass (LLM-assisted) extraction and are recorded for each claim a judgment decides; the success rate counts only claims a tribunal decided on the merits (upheld or dismissed). Award figures are taken from the remedy section of each judgment where present; cases without a quantified award — because the tribunal only determined liability, or because the remedy hearing is pending — are excluded from the compensation figures. Regional splits follow the tribunal's jurisdiction as recorded on gov.uk. Nothing on this page is legal advice or a prediction of any outcome; for any specific matter the gov.uk judgment PDF linked from each case page is the authoritative source.