Case 1301282/2019 · Employment Tribunal

Mrs L Quinn v And others (see attached schedule) -v- Berck Limited (in Creditors’ Voluntary Liquidation) MERITS HEARING — 2020

Case reference: 1301282/2019
Decision date: 28 January 2020
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Perry Appearances
Venue: Birmingham

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mrs L Quinn

Respondent

And others (see attached schedule) -v- Berck Limited (in Creditors’ Voluntary Liquidation) MERITS HEARING

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

Mrs L Quinn and the other listed claimants were employed by Berck Limited at its Pleasant Street, West Bromwich site, and the tribunal found that they were among about 62 employees dismissed as redundant on 20 December 2019. For complaints that had not been presented in time, the tribunal held that it was not reasonably practicable for them to be presented in time and that they were presented within a further reasonable period.

The tribunal declared that the respondent had failed to comply with section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 and that those complaints were well founded. It made a protective award in respect of each claimant who was not marked as a duplicate and ordered the respondent to pay remuneration for a protected period of 90 days beginning on 20 December 2019.

The order also recorded that the claimants present had confirmed receipt from the National Insurance Fund of any monies due in relation to wages, holiday pay, notice and redundancy pay. In the absence of objections within 14 days, those complaints were to be treated as dismissed on withdrawal.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Other	Protective award under section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992; the tribunal found the complaints well founded and ordered remuneration for a protected period of 90 days for each non-duplicate claimant, but the judgment did not quantify individual sums.	Upheld	—	—

Legal tests applied

2 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.

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.