Case 2408910/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M I Abowath Bhana v Fortem International Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 2408910/2022
- Decision date
- 10 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Slater Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M I Abowath Bhana
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent did not defend the claim, so the Employment Judge decided that a determination could properly be made under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. On that basis, the tribunal dealt with the matter without a contested hearing.
The tribunal found that Fortem International Ltd was in breach of contract because it failed to reimburse Mr M I Abowath Bhana for expenses incurred during training in London. The judgment records that damages were awarded in the amount of £98.00 for that breach.
The written record also includes the standard Employment Tribunals interest notice. It states that interest would be payable on awards if unpaid after 14 days from the relevant decision day, which was given as 10 March 2023, with the calculation day stated as 11 March 2023 and the stipulated rate of interest at 8% per annum. The judgment itself does not quantify any interest sum.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The respondent presented a response stating that it did not defend the claim. The tribunal determined the matter under Rule 21 and found the respondent was in breach of contract by failing to reimburse the claimant for expenses incurred during training in London. | Upheld | — | £98 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £98
- across all upheld claims
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.