Claimant v Africa Professional Services Group Limited (in voluntary liquidation)
Outcome
Individual claims
The Tribunal found the Claimant's complaint of constructive unfair dismissal well-founded, awarding damages of £3,715. The First Respondent did not present a Response and the Tribunal determined the claim on available material under Rule 22.
The Tribunal upheld the Claimant's complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages relating to unpaid salary for June 2022 to February 2024, awarding £28,134 plus £6,534 costs incurred due to non-payment. The First Respondent did not contest the claim.
The Claimant succeeded in his claim for unauthorised deductions from wages in respect of unpaid holiday pay on termination, receiving £1,108. The First Respondent failed to defend the claim.
The Tribunal found the First Respondent had made unauthorised deductions in respect of commission payments from 2021 to 2023, awarding the Claimant £36,583.33. No Response was filed by the First Respondent.
The Claimant's claim for breach of contract due to the First Respondent's failure to reimburse work-related expenses was upheld, with aggregate damages of £7,920.08 awarded, including principal and costs incurred as a result of non-payment.
Facts
The Claimant was employed by the First Respondent, which went into voluntary liquidation. He brought claims for constructive unfair dismissal, unauthorised deductions from wages (salary, holiday pay, and commission), and breach of contract (unpaid expenses). The First Respondent had a legal expenses insurance policy with the Second Respondent. Neither respondent filed a Response. The Claimant sought to enforce his award against the Second Respondent under the Third Parties (Rights Against Insurers) Act 2010.
Decision
This is a reconsideration judgment. The Tribunal partially granted the Claimant's reconsideration application, varying its earlier judgment to explicitly state that the First Respondent's liability was statutory in nature under s.13 ERA 1996, not purely contractual. The Tribunal rejected the Claimant's request for a binding order of actual liability against the Second Respondent, stating it could only declare potential liability under s.2(2)(b) TPRAI Act 2010.
Practical note
Employment tribunals can make declarations of potential liability under the TPRAI Act 2010 against insurers where an employer is insolvent, but cannot go beyond their statutory jurisdiction to make binding orders of actual liability; claims for unauthorised deductions are statutory, not contractual, and exclusion clauses in insurance policies must be interpreted accordingly.
Award breakdown
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2303860/2024
- Decision date
- 4 July 2025
- Hearing type
- reconsideration
- Hearing days
- —
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Sector
- professional services
- Represented
- No
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No