Case 3308175/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs R B M Chand v Qube Qualifications and Development Limited (in Creditors Voluntary Liquidation) — 2025
- Case reference
- 3308175/2023
- Decision date
- 27 May 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shastri-Hurst Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs R B M Chand
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal found that the respondent's premises at Bee House, 140 Eastern Avenue, Milton Park, Abingdon constituted an establishment for the purposes of section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992.
The Tribunal recorded that there was no recognised trade union or appointed or elected employee representatives for the purposes of section 188(1B). It upheld the complaint that the respondent failed to comply with a requirement of section 188 and made a protective award in favour of the claimant.
The respondent was ordered to pay remuneration for a protected period of 90 days, or 12.86 weeks, beginning on 28 March 2023, in the amount of £6,924.60.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trade union | Protective award complaint under s188 of TULR(C)A; classified as trade_union_related because the locked taxonomy has no separate protective award category. | Upheld | — | £6,925 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £6,925
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- s188 Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- s188(1B) 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.