Case 1401687/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Acheson Construction Ltd (In Administration) — 2025
- Case reference
- 1401687/2025
- Decision date
- 18 February 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dawson Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe first respondent failed to present a response to the claim. The second respondent stated that it did not resist the claim, and Employment Judge Dawson decided that the claims, or part of them, could properly be determined under rule 22.
The Tribunal found the claimants' claims that the respondent failed to comply with section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 in respect of their dismissals were well founded. It ordered the respondent to pay each claimant a protective award equivalent to 90 days' remuneration beginning on 18 February 2025, with the 1996 recoupment regulations applying.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trade union | The judgment found the claimants' claims under section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 well founded and made a protective award, but did not state monetary figures. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure
- section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- section 189(3) of the 1992 Act
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.