Case 1601032/2022 · Employment Tribunal

Mr J Williams and 10 others (see attached schedule) v Mectec Engineering Ltd (In Administration) and 1 other — 2023

Case reference: 1601032/2022
Decision date: 21 November 2023
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Leith
Panel members: Mr P Collier, Mr B Roberts

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

3 named

Claimant

Mr J Williams and 10 others (see attached schedule)

Respondents

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The tribunal heard conjoined claims by Mr J Williams and 10 other claimants against Mectec Engineering Ltd (in administration) and Mectec Engineering (NW) Ltd. It found that the first respondent failed to comply with regulations 13 and 14 of the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006. The written record notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested.

The tribunal ordered the first respondent to pay compensation of 13 weeks' pay to each claimant. It also held that the second respondent was jointly and severally liable for that award under regulation 15(9) of TUPE 2006. The extracted judgment does not give separate monetary figures for each claimant's award.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Transfer of undertakings (TUPE)	The tribunal found that the first respondent failed to comply with regulations 13 and 14 of TUPE 2006 and ordered compensation of 13 weeks' pay to each claimant. The extracted judgment does not state a separate monetary figure for this claim.	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.