Case 1800491/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G Wilson v Harvard Technology Ltd (In Administration) and 1 other — 2019
- Case reference
- 1800491/2019
- Decision date
- 18 October 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lancaster Members
- Venue
- Leeds
- Panel members
- Mr R Stead, Mr G Corbett
Parties
3 namedKey findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal recorded that the claimant's claim for a protective award succeeded. The First Respondent, Harvard Technology Limited (In Administration), did not enter an appearance and did not attend the hearing; the Second Respondent made general written representations as a person interested in the proceedings but did not attend.
The First Respondent was ordered to pay the claimant remuneration for a protected period of 90 days beginning on 10 December 2018. The judgment stated that the Employment Protection (Recoupment of Benefit) Regulations 1996, regulations 6, 7 and 8, applied, so payment of any award would be postponed pending any recoupment notice by the Secretary of State and only the balance of remuneration due would then be payable directly to the claimant.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment describes this as a claim for a protective award, which succeeded. The award was remuneration for a protected period of 90 days beginning on 10 December 2018; no monetary figure is stated. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Employment Protection (Recoupment of Benefit) Regulations 1996 regulations 6, 7 and 8
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.