Case 1600621/2023 · Employment Tribunal

Mrs C Cottrell (C1) Mrs L Adam (C2) Mrs L Peart (C3) Mrs R Williams (C4) Mrs S Merrory (C5) Mrs T Sullivan (C6) v Mufulira Ltd (in Compulsory Liquidation) HELD AT: Wrexham (by CVP – Video) — 2025

Case reference: 1600621/2023
Decision date: 17 February 2025
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge T. Vincent Ryan

Indexed: 18 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mrs C Cottrell (C1) Mrs L Adam (C2) Mrs L Peart (C3) Mrs R Williams (C4) Mrs S Merrory (C5) Mrs T Sullivan (C6)

Respondent

Mufulira Ltd (in Compulsory Liquidation) HELD AT: Wrexham (by CVP – Video)

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The Tribunal found that the Respondent failed to comply with section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. It made a protective award in respect of all six Claimants, who were employed at the same establishment, Ridgeway Care Centre, and were dismissed on 28 October 2022.

The Respondent was ordered to pay remuneration to all Claimants for the period of 90 days beginning on 28 October 2022. The judgment also reminded the Respondent of its obligations under the Employment Protection (Recoupment of Benefits) Regulations 1996.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Trade union	The judgment found a failure to comply with section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 and made a protective award, but did not state a monetary amount.	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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.