Case 1302385/2023 · Employment Tribunal

Mr R Sturgess and Others (see Schedule) v Vivarail Ltd (in administration) and 1 other — 2022

Case reference: 1302385/2023
Decision date: 1 December 2022
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Mr

Indexed: 22 May 2026

Parties

3 named

Claimant

Mr R Sturgess and Others (see Schedule)

Respondents

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

At a hearing on 30 October 2023 before Employment Judge Mr J S Burns, with the Claimants represented by Ms N Toner and no appearance for either Respondent, the tribunal dealt with complaints that Vivarail Ltd (in administration) had breached its duty to consult under section 188 TULCA 1992. The judgment states that those complaints were well founded.

The tribunal ordered protective awards under sections 189 and 190 TULCA 1992 to each claimant listed in the Schedule. The award period was 70 days starting on 1 December 2022. The judgment does not set out any separate monetary amounts in the extracted text, only the entitlement to protective awards for the named claimants.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Other	Complaint under section 188 TULCA 1992 that the First Respondent breached its duty to consult. The tribunal found the complaint well founded and ordered protective awards under sections 189 and 190 for each claimant in the Schedule, for a period of 70 days starting on 1 December 2022.	Upheld	—	—

Legal tests applied

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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.