Case 2414538/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Iram Zaman v Sonetik UK Ltd (In voluntary liquidation) — 2020
- Case reference
- 2414538/2019
- Decision date
- 4 August 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phil Allen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Iram Zaman
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent did not present a response. On the information before the Judge, the Tribunal issued judgment under Rule 21 without a hearing.
The Tribunal found that the respondent failed to comply with its statutory collective consultation obligations under section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 before proposed redundancy dismissals took effect at the Preston establishment. The claim for failure to consult was well founded, and a protective award was made for the claimant for a protected period of 90 days beginning on 25 September 2019.
The Tribunal also found that the respondent made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and awarded £2,550 gross. It found breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded £2,975, and breach of contract for failure to pay expenses incurred and awarded £106.43.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Protective award for failure to comply with statutory collective consultation obligations before proposed redundancy dismissals; remuneration ordered for a protected period of 90 days from 25 September 2019, but no monetary figure is stated. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Gross sum awarded for unauthorised deduction from wages. | Upheld | — | £2,550 |
| Breach of contract | Damages awarded for dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice. | Upheld | — | £2,975 |
| Breach of contract | Damages awarded for breach of contract by failing to pay expenses incurred. | Upheld | — | £106 |
Legal tests applied
3 references- Rule 21 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- Section 188 Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- Sections 189(1)(d), (2), (3) and (4) Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
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.