VadeLab
Allowed in PartEmployment Tribunal·england-and-wales·

Employer Partially Liable for Unlawful Wage Deductions in Employment Case

Case No. 6017715/2024 · Judge Cowx

📌 In brief

An employment tribunal decided in part that an employer could not make unauthorised deductions from an employee's wages. The decision highlights the importance of adhering to legal requirements when making wage deductions.

⚖️ Legal holding

An employer must not make unauthorised deductions from an employee's wages, even if there is a prior agreement to deduct future leave allowances.

Topics

unlawful deductionwages

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Employment Rights Act 1996 s.13

An employer cannot take money from an employee's wages without permission. Permission can come from a law or from something written in the employee's contract. Alternatively, the employee must have agreed in writing beforehand to allow the deduction.

Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.

📖 Technical summary

The Employment Tribunal ruled that the employer was partially liable for unlawful wage deductions under Section 13(1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Employment Tribunal ruled that the employer was partially liable for unlawful wage deductions from an employee's wages, upholding the claimant's right to receive full payment except for lawful sickness absences.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed in Part

Case No. 6017715/2024

EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS

Claimant: [redacted]

Respondents:

[redacted]

Manchester (by CVP) ON: 18 March 2026 BEFORE: Judge Cowx (sitting alone)

REPRESENTATION: Claimant: [redacted] Mrs [APPELLANT] [NAME]

1. The claimant’s claim of unlawful deductions from wages contrary to Section 13(1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 is partly well founded and succeeds in part as follows.

2. The claimant was entitled to the payment of her wages for the period 16th July 2024 to 23rd August 2024. Before the deduction of income tax and national insurance and other deductions she was entitled to the sum £2,373.80.

3. The [APPELLANT] was not entitled to make a deduction from this sum on the basis that the claimant had, by agreement with the [APPELLANT], taken paid leave in excess of her 2023/2024 annual leave allowance which was to be deducted from her 2024/2025 leave allowance.

4. In accordance with the claimant’s contract of employment the [APPELLANT] was entitled to make a deduction from the above sum for those days or parts of days when the claimant was absent by reason of sickness. The lawful deduction in regard to sickness absences on 13th, 14th and 19th August 2024, for the total of 17½ hours, was the sum of £200.20.

Case No. 6017715/2024

5. The [APPELLANT] is ordered to pay the claimant the sum of £2,173.60. This figure has been calculated using gross monthly pay and the [APPELLANT] is to deduct from that amount the required sum payable to HM Revenue and Customs for Income Tax and National Insurance.

_____________________________

Judge Cowx

18 March 2026

JUDGMENT SENT TO THE PARTIES ON

22 April 2026

FOR THE TRIBUNAL OFFICE

Notes

1. Reasons for the judgment having been given orally at the hearing, written reasons will not be provided unless a request 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.

2. Judgments and reasons for the judgments are published, in full, online at www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions shortly after a copy has been sent to the claimant(s) and [APPELLANT](s) in a case.

Case No. 6017715/2024

NOTICE

THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (INTEREST) ORDER 1990 ARTICLE 12

Case number: 6017715/2024

Name of case: [NAME] [APPELLANT]

v Mrs [NAME] [NAME] is payable when an Employment Tribunal makes an award or determination requiring one party to proceedings to pay a sum of money to another party, apart from sums representing costs or expenses.

No interest is payable if the sum is paid in full within 14 days after the date the Tribunal sent the written record of the decision to the parties. The date the Tribunal sent the written record of the decision to the parties is called the relevant decision day.

Interest starts to accrue from the day immediately after the relevant decision day. That is called the calculation day.

The rate of interest payable is the rate specified in section 17 of the Judgments Act 1838 on the relevant decision day. This is known as the stipulated rate of interest.

The Secretary of the Tribunal is required to give you notice of the relevant decision day, the calculation day, and the stipulated rate of interest in your case. They are as follows:

the relevant decision day in this case is: 22 April 2026

the calculation day in this case is:23 April 2026

the stipulated rate of interest is: 8% per annum.

[NAME] For the Employment Tribunal Office

Case No. 6017715/2024

GUIDANCE NOTE

1. There is more information about Tribunal judgments here, which you should read with this guidance note: www.gov.uk/government/publications/employment-tribunal-hearings-judgment-guide-t426

If you do not have access to the internet, you can ask for a paper copy by telephoning the Tribunal office dealing with the claim.

2. The payment of interest on Employment Tribunal awards is governed by The Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990. Interest is payable on Employment Tribunal awards if they remain wholly or partly unpaid more than 14 days after the relevant decision day. Sums in the award that represent costs or expenses are excluded. Interest starts to accrue from the day immediately after the relevant decision day, which is called the calculation day.

3. The date of the relevant decision day in your case is set out in the Notice. If the judgment is paid in full by that date, no interest will be payable. If the judgment is not paid in full by that date, interest will start to accrue from the next day.

4. Requesting written reasons after you have received a written judgment does not change the date of the relevant decision day.

5. Interest will be calculated as simple interest accruing from day to day on any part of the sum of money awarded by the Tribunal that remains unpaid.

6. If the person paying the Tribunal award is required to pay part of it to a public authority by way of tax or National Insurance, no interest is payable on that part.

7. If the Secretary of State has claimed any part of the sum awarded by the Tribunal in a recoupment notice, no interest is payable on that part.

8. If the sum awarded is varied, either because the Tribunal reconsiders its own judgment, or following an appeal to the Employment Appeal Tribunal or a higher court, interest will still be payable from the calculation day but it will be payable on the new sum not the sum originally awarded.

9. The online information explains how Employment Tribunal awards are enforced. The interest element of an award is enforced in the same way.

📊 How courts decide similar cases

Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:

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 must not make unauthorised deductions from an employee's wages, even if there is a prior agreement to deduct future leave allowances.| An employer must pay unlawfully deducted wages to an employee as provided by s.12(4) of the Employment Rights Act 1996.| An employer must not treat an employee unfavourably because of something arising from their disability or engage in conduct that constitutes harassment related| An employer must compensate an employee for unauthorised wage deductions, breaches of contractual notice periods, and failure to forward pension contributions.| An employer must pay notice period wages if they terminate an employee without providing the required notice.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • An employer must not reject a job application or dismiss an employee based on their disability, as this constitutes direct and indirect discrimination under the| An employer must not unfairly dismiss an employee without a fair reason under the Employment Rights Act 1996.|

Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The Employment Tribunal ruled that the employer was partially liable for unlawful wage deductions from the employee's wages.

Who was involved?

An employee and their employer were involved in a dispute over unauthorised wage deductions.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided based on the Employment Rights Act 1996, which prohibits employers from making unauthorised deductions from wages.

Which laws or rules were applied?

Section 13(1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was applied to determine the legality of wage deductions.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The key argument was whether the employer had a lawful basis for making deductions from the employee's wages.

Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?

The decision was in part for the person who brought the case, as it ruled against unauthorised wage deductions.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation should ensure that any wage deductions comply with legal requirements to avoid disputes.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The contract of employment and the specific circumstances surrounding the wage deductions were crucial.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, decisions from Employment Tribunals can typically be appealed to the Employment Appeal Tribunal.

Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?

It is advisable to seek legal advice from a qualified solicitor for such cases.

Official source: Employment Tribunal — england-and-wales headnote and full judgment reproduced from the court's public records. View on the official source ↗Summary, holding, technical summary and questions: produced by Artificial Intelligence based on the official headnote and judgment. These are VadeLab’s own material and are not the work of the Court.This decision was issued by the Employment Tribunal and is reproduced from its published records. VadeLab is not affiliated with, and this page is not endorsed by, that court or tribunal.