Claimant v Sureserve Asset Services Ltd

The tribunal found that the claimant's contractual notice period during his probationary period was one month, not three months. Clause 3.1 of the contract provided for one month's notice during the probationary period (after the first month of employment), and clause 19.1 was expressly subject to the probationary period terms. The claimant had been paid in lieu of one month's notice as contractually entitled. The tribunal rejected arguments that the probationary period only applied to capability dismissals or that the respondent's letter had varied the contract.

The tribunal found that the car allowance clause (clause 15) entitled the claimant to receive £4,400 per annum 'for business purposes' which was 'fixed for and payable for 3 years'. The tribunal interpreted this to mean the allowance was payable monthly whilst the claimant was employed and using his car for business purposes, and that the rate was fixed for three years if he remained employed. The clause did not survive termination of employment, unlike other clauses (e.g. confidentiality) which explicitly stated they continued post-termination. The claimant had received three months of car allowance in total and was not entitled to further payment.

This claim related to the same car allowance issue. The tribunal found there was no contractual entitlement to receive car allowance after termination of employment, and therefore no unlawful deduction from wages. The claimant had been paid what he was contractually entitled to receive.