Case 3305920/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v K3 Business Technologies Ltd (in administration) — 2020
- Case reference
- 3305920/2020
- Decision date
- 24 April 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Anstis
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent, K3 Business Technologies Limited (in administration), failed to present a response to the claims. The judgment records that the respondent's administrators consented to the claims for a protective award proceeding, and judgment was entered under Rule 21.
Each claimant listed in the attached schedule was held entitled to a protective award under section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. The protected period was 90 days, starting on the date shown in the schedule for each claimant, with dates ranging from 21 April 2020 to 26 June 2020.
The judgment did not set out a monetary total or split the award into monetary components. It recorded that the Employment Protection (Recoupment of Benefits) Regulations 1996 may apply to the award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Protective award under section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992; no dedicated protective award claim_type is available in the locked taxonomy. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 21 of Schedule 1 to the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
- section 189 of the 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.