Hall & McLaughlin v Printyard Ltd & Department for Employment and Learning [2014]
Decision Number: Legal Body: Northern Ireland Industrial Tribunal
Published on: 25/07/2014
Article Authors The main content of this article was provided by the following authors.
Background

Each of the two claimants made applications to the Redundancy Payments Service (RPS), in its capacity as the statutory guarantor for employment debts, in respect of debts which they said were owed to them by the respondent. Both of those applications were unsuccessful, in respect of notice pay and in respect of redundancy pay. Both claimants appealed those decisions. Since the first respondent has been the subject of a winding up order the main hearing was held only in respect of the relevant claimant’s appeals against the relevant RPS decisions. 

The company was not making any payments to HMRC in respect of either of the two claimants’ wages, which was a blatant breach of the income tax legislation. It was held that the claimant was well aware at all relevant times that the respondent was not making deductions as required by law under the PAYE system. 

In situations in which an employee knows that his employer is not properly deducting tax from his wages, the employee is nevertheless entitled to pursue a claim unless the contract of employment is vitiated by reason of illegality. In the specific context of PAYE under-deductions, only illegality as to performance is relevant. In the absence of evidence that either employee ‘participated’ in the illegal performance of the contract, the Tribunal held that it had no power to decline to enforce it. However, it nevertheless held that the claimants could not get away with relying upon the statutory guarantee without having to pay their fair share of taxes. 


Practical Lessons

The tribunal clearly indicated that the effect of the ‘Income Tax (PAYE) Regulations 2003’ is that HMRC can make employees liable for the amount of any under-deduction. Whilst, technically, the Department was required to pay the respective sums of money in this case, the Tribunal signalled that the HMRC were entitled to be informed of the findings of the Tribunal in order to make the employees liable for the amount of the under-deduction. 

As ever, full case decisions for NI cases are available on the OITFET website:
http://www.employmenttribunalsni.co.uk/

Continue reading

We help hundreds of people like you understand how the latest changes in employment law impact your business.

Already a subscriber?

Please log in to view the full article.

What you'll get:

  • Help understand the ramifications of each important case from NI, GB and Europe
  • Ensure your organisation's policies and procedures are fully compliant with NI law
  • 24/7 access to all the content in the Legal Island Vault for research case law and HR issues
  • Receive free preliminary advice on workplace issues from the employment team

Already a subscriber? Log in now or start a free trial

Disclaimer The information in this article is provided as part of Legal Island's Employment Law Hub. We regret we are not able to respond to requests for specific legal or HR queries and recommend that professional advice is obtained before relying on information supplied anywhere within this article. This article is correct at 25/07/2014