Employer Ordered to Pay Compensation for Unauthorised Wage Deductions and Breach of Employment Act
📌 In brief
The claimant won their case against the employer for unauthorised wage deductions and failure to provide a written statement of employment particulars. The Employment Tribunal ordered the employer to pay £2617.53 plus interest, as well as compensation under section 38 of the Employment Act 2002.
⚖️ Legal holding
An employer must provide a written statement of employment particulars to an employee, failing which the employer is liable for compensation under section 38 Employment Act 2002.
📖 Technical summary
The claimant successfully claimed unauthorised wage deductions and breach of employment particulars provision.
📜 Headnote Official document
The claimant successfully argued that the employer made unauthorised deductions from wages between November 2024 to March 2026 and failed to provide a written statement of employment particulars, as required by law. The Employment Tribunal awarded compensation in accordance with section 38 of the Employment Act 2002.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
Case Number: 2300026/2026
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS
Claimant: [redacted]
Respondent: [redacted]
On: 30 April 2025
Before: EJ Rice-Birchall
Representation Claimant: [redacted]
Respondent: [redacted]
1. The complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages is well-founded. The respondent made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages in the period November 2024 to March 2026.
2. The respondent shall pay the claimant £2617.53, which is the gross sum deducted. The claimant is also awarded interest of £130.19. The claimant is responsible for the payment of any tax or National Insurance.
3. The respondent was in breach of its duty to provide the claimant with a written statement of employment particulars. There are no exceptional circumstances that make an award of an amount equal to two weeks’ gross pay unjust or inequitable. In accordance with section 38 Employment Act 2002 the respondent shall therefore pay the claimant £328.75.
Approved by:
Employment Judge Rice-Birchall
30 April 2026
Notes Summary reasons for the judgment having been given orally at the hearing, written reasons will not be provided unless a request for either written summary reasons or written full reasons was made by either party at the hearing or a written request is presented by either party within 14 days of the sending of this written record of the decision. If the claimant requests written
summary reasons then the Tribunal may, if it considers it appropriate to do so, provide written full reasons.
All judgments (apart from judgments under Rule 51) and any written reasons for the judgments are published, in full, online at https://www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions shortly after a copy has been sent to the claimants and respondents. If a Tribunal hearing has been recorded, you may request a transcript of the recording. Unless there are exceptional circumstances, you will have to pay for it. If a transcript is produced it will not include any oral judgment or reasons given at the hearing. The transcript will not be checked, approved or verified by a judge. There is more information in the joint Presidential Practice Direction on the Recording and Transcription of Hearings and accompanying Guidance, which can be found here:
www.judiciary.uk/guidance-and-resources/employment-rules-and-legislation-practice-directions/
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Rules Unauthorised Wage Deductions Invalid
- Employment Tribunal Unauthorised Wage Deductions: Employment Tribunal Decision
- Employment Tribunal Unauthorised Wage Deductions and Holiday Pay: Claimant Wins in Employment T…
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Rules Against Unauthorised Wage Deductions
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Allows Unfair Dismissal Claim, But Compensation Reduced
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Rules on Disability Discrimination and Pay Statements
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Decision: Disability Discrimination and Reasonable Adju…
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Rules on Age Discrimination and Disability Adjustments
A snapshot of this collection — not a prediction of your case's outcome.
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- An employer failing to provide a written statement of employment particulars leads to compensation under section 38 Employment Act 2002.| An employer making unauthorised deductions from wages or failing to pay accrued but untaken holiday pay results in claims being allowed.| Unauthorised wage deductions without lawful justification are grounds for allowing claims.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- Claims that do not comply with procedural rules and have no reasonable chance of success are struck out.| Claims alleging discriminatory practices or the need for reasonable adjustments must be substantiated by evidence to succeed.| Proving an impairment substantially and long-term adversely affects normal day-to-day activities is required to qualify as a disability claim.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The claimant won their case against the employer for unauthorised wage deductions and failure to provide a written statement of employment particulars.
Who was involved?
A worker (the claimant) brought the case against an employer (the respondent).
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided in favour of the claimant because the employer made unauthorised wage deductions and failed to provide a written statement of employment particulars as required by law.
Which laws or rules were applied?
Section 38 Employment Act 2002, s.98 Employment Rights Act 1996, Equality Act 2010 s.13 and reg 3 Working Time Regulations 1998 were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The claimant's argument about unauthorised wage deductions and failure to provide a written statement of employment particulars was crucial.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was in favour of the claimant.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation can seek compensation if their employer makes unauthorised wage deductions and fails to provide a written statement of employment particulars.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The evidence included records showing the unauthorised wage deductions and lack of written statements from the employer.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, decisions can often be appealed but it depends on specific circumstances and legal grounds.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is highly recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for such cases.