Case 2207432/2021 · Employment Tribunal
(1) MR N ASOKKUMAR (2) MR P BUNGSRAZ v OCS Group UK Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 2207432/2021
- Decision date
- 26 April 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Klimov
Parties
2 namedClaimant
(1) MR N ASOKKUMAR (2) MR P BUNGSRAZ
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing on 25 April 2022, Employment Judge Klimov decided that the claimants' allegations concerning a failure relating to the election of employee representatives under Regulation 14 of the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 had little reasonable prospect of success.
The claimants were ordered to pay a deposit of £200 within 21 days as a condition of continuing those allegations. The judgment records that the claimants failed to pay the deposit, and the allegations were therefore struck out under rule 39(4) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Transfer of undertakings (TUPE) | Allegations of failure relating to the election of employee representatives under Regulation 14 of TUPE were struck out after the claimants failed to pay a deposit ordered as a condition of continuing those allegations. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- Regulation 14 of the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006
- rule 39(4) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- little reasonable prospect of success
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.