Employment Tribunal Upholds Workers' Claims Against Employer for Wage Deductions and Holiday Pay
📌 In brief
In this case, an employment tribunal found that the employer had unlawfully deducted money from employees' wages and did not provide them with their rightful holiday pay. As a result, the employer was required to pay compensation to the affected workers.
⚖️ Legal holding
An employer must comply with statutory requirements regarding wages and holiday pay or face legal consequences.
📖 Technical summary
The Employment Judge ruled in favour of the claimants, finding that the respondent breached employment laws by making unauthorised wage deductions and failing to pay holiday entitlements.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Employment Judge ruled in favour of the claimants, finding that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from wages and failed to pay holiday entitlements. The judge ordered the employer to compensate the workers accordingly.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
Case Number: 3301794-5/2025 & 3301796-7/2025
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS
Claimant: [redacted]
[NAME]
Respondent: [redacted]
1. The claims were presented in the South East Employment Tribunal on 8 April 2025. The respondent has failed to present a valid response on time. The Employment Judge has decided that a determination can properly be made of the claim, or part of it, in accordance with rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure.
2. The respondent has made unauthorised deductions from the claimant’s wages and must pay [APPELLANT] £1,288.46 gross. You must pay Miss [APPELLANT] £1,365.00.
3. The claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and the respondent must pay damages to [APPELLANT] of £6,378.84. You must pay Miss [APPELLANT] £2,150.08.
4. The respondent has failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement and must pay [APPELLANT] £1,288.46. You must pay Miss [APPELLANT] £1,435.50.
5. The respondent must pay [APPELLANT] £8,955.76 in total. The respondent must also pay [NAME] £4,950.58 in total.
Approved by:
Employment Judge Tynan
Date: 16 July 2025
JUDGMENT SENT TO THE PARTIES ON
13 August 2025
..................................................................... FOR THE TRIBUNAL OFFICE
Case Numbers: 3301794-7/2025
1 of 2
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS
Claimants
Respondent
[APPELLANT] (1) [NAME] (2) v [RESPONDENT] [COMPANY] at: Cambridge
On:
12 March 2026
Before: Employment Judge Tynan
Appearances For the Claimants:
[redacted]
For the Respondent: [redacted] Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 for reconsideration of the judgment dated 16 July 2025, which was sent to the parties on 13 August 2025 (“the Judgment”).
JUDGMENT on RECONSIDERATION APPLICATION
1. It is not necessary in the interests of justice to reconsider the Judgment. Furthermore, and in any event, there is no reasonable prospect of the Judgment being varied or revoked. In the circumstances, the application for reconsideration is refused.
Approved by:
Employment Judge Tynan Date: 12 March 2026 Sent to the parties on: 1 May 2026…………..……….
For the Tribunal:
…………….…………….……..
Case Numbers: 3301794-7/2025
2 of 2
Note
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.
Public access to Employment Tribunal decisions
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 Respondent(s) in a case.
Recording and Transcription Please note that if a Tribunal Hearing has been recorded you may request a transcript of the recording, for which a charge is likely to be payable in most but not all circumstances. 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: https://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 Worker Wins Case Against Employer Over Wages, Holiday Pay and Dismissal
- Employment Tribunal Unauthorised Wage Deductions: Employment Tribunal Decision
- Employment Tribunal Workers Win Case Against Employer for Wage Deductions and Holiday Pay
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Rules in Favour of Claimant: Damages Awarded for Unpaid…
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Allows Unfair Dismissal Case Due to Administrative Erro…
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Strikes Out Unfair Dismissal Claim for Insufficient Ser…
- Employment Tribunal Claimant's Unfair Dismissal Claim Struck Out by Employment Tribunal
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Strips Harassment Case Over Lack of Merit
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Dismisses Race Discrimination Claim for Lack of Qualify…
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 or fail to pay their holiday entitlement.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- A claimant must have at least two years of continuous employment to bring an unfair dismissal claim 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 Judge ruled in favour of the claimants, finding that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from wages and failed to provide holiday entitlements.
Who was involved?
A worker brought a case against their employer for wage deductions and unpaid holiday pay.
How did the court decide, and why?
The judge decided in favour of the claimants because the respondent had breached statutory requirements regarding wages and holiday pay.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Employment Rights Act 1996, Equality Act 2010, and Working Time Regulations 1998 were cited as relevant provisions.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The claimants' argument that the employer had breached statutory requirements regarding wages and holiday pay was decisive.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was in favour of the claimants.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone facing similar issues should consult an employment lawyer to understand their rights and options.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Evidence regarding wage deductions and holiday entitlements likely played a crucial role.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, decisions from Employment Tribunals can typically be appealed under certain conditions.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is highly recommended to seek legal advice from an employment solicitor in such cases.
