Case 2501400/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs B.Chhetri. v Ashes Care Group Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 2501400/2024
- Decision date
- 28 August 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge T.R. Smith
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs B.Chhetri.
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the claim on 28 August 2024 at the Newcastle Civil and Family Courts and Tribunal Centre via CVP, before Employment Judge T.R. Smith sitting alone. The claimant appeared in person and the respondent did not attend and had not entered a response. The claimant provided information and supporting documentation as directed and gave evidence on affirmation.
The tribunal found the complaint of unlawful deduction from wages well-founded and ordered the respondent to pay three weeks' wages amounting to £1,274. The complaint of non-payment of holiday pay covering 5.6 weeks was also well-founded, with £1,984.50 ordered. The tribunal was satisfied the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and, under section 163 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, ordered a statutory redundancy payment of £1,063.12.
The tribunal noted a Companies House search on 28 August 2024 showed the respondent was still active, with a compulsory strike-off application suspended on 3 July 2024. Judgement was determined pursuant to rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Three weeks' wages ordered to be paid forthwith. | Upheld | — | £1,274 |
| Holiday pay | Non-payment of holiday (5.6 weeks) well-founded. | Upheld | — | £1,985 |
| Redundancy | Statutory redundancy payment under s.163 ERA 1996. | Upheld | — | £1,063 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,322
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 163 Employment Rights Act 1996
- rule 21 Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
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.