Tax and deductions from pay
In Soteriou v Ultrachem, Solvo Ltd and Ultracolour Ltd, the EAT upholds an employment tribunal's decision that an employee's knowing and active participation in the deception of the tax authorities as to his employment status was primarily for his own benefit.
An employer was not entitled to withhold sick pay from an employee who took sick leave because of anxiety and depression immediately after being disciplined for misconduct, notwithstanding a contractual clause excluding such entitlement where sickness was "due, or attributable, to his own misconduct", the EAT holds in Manchester City Council v Thurston.
In Beveridge v KLM UK Ltd [2000] IRLR 765 EAT, the EAT held that when an employee is fit and willing to work, the employer is obliged to pay the employee his or her normal wages or salary unless there is an express term in the contract of employment authorising the employer to withhold pay in certain defined circumstances.
Employees whose contractual working hours were 39 hours per week but who, in practice, were required to work six hours' overtime made available to them to the extent of 45 hours per week were not guaranteed that overtime, so holds the EAT in Spence and others v City of Sunderland Council.
A compromise to settle an employee's claim for compensation for unfair dismissal, reached during the employment tribunal proceedings and recorded by the tribunal in a document headed "Decision of the [employment] tribunal", did not prevent the employee from subsequently bringing proceedings in the county court for unpaid wages, holds the Court of Appeal in Dattani v Trio Supermarkets Ltd.
In Robertson v Blackstone Franks Investment Management Ltd, the Court of Appeal holds that an investment consultant suffered unlawful deductions from his wages when commission earned in respect of work done before his contract was terminated, but payable after termination, was not paid.
The posting in a factory of a notice which stated that accrued holiday pay would not be given to employees dismissed for gross misconduct did not amount to the requisite written notification to the workers of a contractual term authorising a deduction from their wages, holds the EAT in (1) Kerr v The Sweater Shop (Scotland) Ltd (2) The Sweater Shop (Scotland) Ltd v Park.
An employer was contractually entitled to make changes to an incentive bonus scheme without the consent of employees individually or their trade union representatives, holds the EAT in Airlie and others v City of Edinburgh District Council.
Where employees argue that they have not received the full pay to which they are entitled and that this amounts to an unlawful deduction under the Wages Act, the industrial tribunal must first determine any dispute about what wages are properly payable under the contract, the EAT confirms in Yemm and others v British Steel plc.
In Discount Tobacco & Confectionery Ltd v Williamson [1993] IRLR 327 EAT, the EAT upheld an employment tribunal's decision that in order for a deduction to be lawful, it is not sufficient that the employee gives written consent before the deduction is made. The employee's written agreement must have been given before the conduct or event giving rise to the deduction.
Employment law cases: HR and legal information and guidance relating to tax and deductions from pay.