EAT (Unlawful Deduction From Wages) CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT – Damages for breach of contract
The Employment Judge’s findings of fact and conclusions on the reason for dismissal and its fairness were permissible in light of the evidence and disclose no error of law. They are adequately reasoned.
However, the Employment Judge misdirected himself in law in relation to the unlawful deductions / breach of contract claim. He referred to the approach to calculating a week’s pay for the purposes of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (‘ERA’) where an employee has no normal working hours. This is irrelevant. He referred to section 229 ERA and the concept of a just apportionment in cases where that is appropriate. This too is irrelevant. By contrast, he made no reference to the relevant provisions at issue, namely sections 13(3) and 27 ERA. He made no reference to the requirement to make findings of fact as to the Claimant’s contractual entitlement to pay or to payments that were properly payable by reference to her employment, in order to identify whether and to what extent there had been a shortfall. His conclusions at paragraph 56 demonstrate that he misapplied the law by reference to those irrelevant provisions in reaching his conclusion that there was no shortfall.
It being impossible to conclude that there is only one outcome of a proper analysis, this issue only is remitted to a fresh tribunal for re-hearing.
Judges:
Simler DBE P J
Citations:
[2016] UKEAT 0044 – 16 – 1110
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Employment
Updated: 04 February 2022; Ref: scu.577863
