Claimant v Lucy Rose Smith
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found that the respondent made unlawful deductions from the claimant's wages in January 2025 (£306) and February 2025 (£50), totalling £356. The claimant was determined to be a worker within the meaning of section 230(3)(b) Employment Rights Act 1996, giving her protection against unauthorised deductions.
Facts
The claimant, Emily May Gregg, worked for the respondent, Lucy Rose Smith, in an individual employment arrangement. The respondent made deductions from the claimant's wages in January 2025 (£306) and February 2025 (£50) which the claimant alleged were unauthorised. A preliminary issue was whether the claimant had worker status under section 230(3)(b) Employment Rights Act 1996.
Decision
The tribunal found that the claimant was a worker within the meaning of section 230(3)(b) ERA 1996 and declared this. The tribunal upheld the complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages and ordered the respondent to pay the claimant £356 gross, representing the unlawful deductions made in January and February 2025.
Practical note
Worker status under section 230(3)(b) ERA 1996 can extend protection against unlawful wage deductions to individuals working for private individuals, not just companies.
Award breakdown
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 3302636/2025
- Decision date
- 17 October 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Name
- Lucy Rose Smith
- Sector
- other
- Represented
- No
- Rep type
- self
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister