Case 2414396/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Chowdhury (1) Mrs N Ali (s) v Intelling Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2414396/2021
- Decision date
- 18 August 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sharkett REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Chowdhury (1) Mrs N Ali (s)
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a hearing on 27 July 2022 before Employment Judge Sharkett, the parties reached terms of settlement in the linked cases against Intelling Ltd. The written judgment records that the respondent would pay Mr S Chowdhury a gross sum of £1,594 and Mrs N Ali a gross sum of £541.98 in respect of unlawful deduction of wages, with any employee tax or national insurance liability for those payments to be borne by the relevant claimant.
The same consent terms also recorded an injury to feelings payment of £8,000 to Mrs N Ali. Payment was to be made by 28 August 2022, with liberty to apply by 31 August 2022; after that date the claims were to be dismissed upon withdrawal by the claimants. No substantive liability findings or written reasons were provided in the record supplied.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | First claimant. The written consent order records a gross sum of £1,594 but does not specify the underlying head of claim in the text provided. | Settled | — | £1,594 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Second claimant. The consent order states this sum was in respect of unlawful deduction of wages. | Settled | — | £542 |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | Second claimant. The written order awards £8,000 as an injury to feelings payment; the underlying discrimination head is not expressly named in the extracted text, but the case was listed under maternity and pregnancy rights. | Settled | Pregnancy and maternity | £8,000 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £10,136
- 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.