Case 3308961/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms A Talatam v Chainbox Technology UK Ltd (Previously Chainbox Technology) and 1 other — 2023
- Case reference
- 3308961/2022
- Decision date
- 24 February 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Othen Representation
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Ms A Talatam
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal amended the name of the first respondent from Chainbox Technology to Chainbox Technology UK LTD under Rule 34. The case was heard at Watford on 27 January 2023 before Employment Judge Othen, with the claimant appearing in person and the respondents represented.
By consent, the hearing was adjourned to allow the parties to implement the agreed terms of a settlement. The judgment states that either party could apply to restore the case for further hearing in default, and that if no such application was received by 24 February 2023 the claim would stand dismissed.
No findings on the underlying unlawful deduction from wages claim were given, and no monetary award was recorded in the judgment. The written record also states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in time.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | No merits determination was made. The judgment records that the hearing was adjourned by consent to allow the parties to implement the agreed terms of a settlement, with liberty to apply to restore the case in default. | Settled | — | — |
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.