Case 4104084/2020 · Employment Tribunal

Mr G Cheung v Ability Hotels (Aberdeen) Ltd — 2020

Case reference: 4104084/2020
Decision date: 2 September 2020
Jurisdiction: Scotland
Judge: Employment Judge F Eccles
Venue: Glasgow

Indexed: 21 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr G Cheung

Respondent

Ability Hotels (Aberdeen) Ltd

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

No response having been presented to the claim, the Employment Judge issued judgment on the available information under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. The tribunal found that Ability Hotels (Aberdeen) Ltd had failed to comply with its obligations under sections 188 and 188A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992.

The tribunal therefore awarded the claimant a protective award under section 189 of the 1992 Act. The judgment states that the protected award was for 90 days starting on 19 May 2020. The extracted text does not record any separate monetary calculation or total amount.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Other	Protective award made under section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 after the respondent failed to comply with sections 188 and 188A. The judgment states the award was for 90 days starting on 19 May 2020, but no monetary sum is set out in the extracted text.	Upheld	—	—

Legal tests applied

4 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.