Case 2603340/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs S Edwards Mrs S Bhebe v Berrystead Nursing and Residential Home Limited T/A Berrystead Nursing Home — 2024
- Case reference
- 2603340/2023
- Decision date
- 10 April 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge McTigue
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs S Edwards Mrs S Bhebe
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 30 August 2023 Employment Judge V Butler had already decided that the respondent breached s.188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 and that Mrs S Edwards and Mrs S Bhebe were entitled to a protective award of ninety days' pay. The present judgment was heard on the papers by Employment Judge McTigue on 5 April 2024.
The claimants presented complaints under s.192 TULCRA on 22 December 2023. The respondent did not submit an ET3 in response. The tribunal found the s.192 complaints well founded and recorded that the respondent had failed to make a protective award to either claimant.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay Mrs S Edwards £6,873.75 and Mrs S Bhebe £6,825. The judgment does not break the award down into separate compensation components beyond those sums.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Protective award complaint under s.192 TULCRA; the respondent did not submit an ET3. The judgment records that Employment Judge V Butler had already found a breach of s.188 TULCRA and that Mrs S Edwards was entitled to a protective award of ninety days' pay. | Upheld | — | £6,874 |
| Other | Protective award complaint under s.192 TULCRA; the respondent did not submit an ET3. The judgment records that Employment Judge V Butler had already found a breach of s.188 TULCRA and that Mrs S Bhebe was entitled to a protective award of ninety days' pay. | Upheld | — | £6,825 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £13,699
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.188 TULCRA
- s.192 TULCRA
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.