Case 1801331/2024 · Employment Tribunal
(1) Ms Chantelle Devine (2) Mr David Wheeler (3) Mr Jonathan Reed (4) Mr Anthony Swift (5) Mr John Funnell (6) Mr Cameron Helders (7) Ms Stephanie Turner (8) Ms Sarah Watkins (9) Mr David Hilton (10) Ms Linda Lancaster-Harm (11) Mr Chris Bennett (12) Mr Gary Paul (13) Mr Robin Mawson v Lontra Limited (in administration) — 2025
- Case reference
- 1801331/2024
- Decision date
- 14 April 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge White REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
(1) Ms Chantelle Devine (2) Mr David Wheeler (3) Mr Jonathan Reed (4) Mr Anthony Swift (5) Mr John Funnell (6) Mr Cameron Helders (7) Ms Stephanie Turner (8) Ms Sarah Watkins (9) Mr David Hilton (10) Ms Linda Lancaster-Harm (11) Mr Chris Bennett (12) Mr Gary Paul (13) Mr Robin Mawson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case concerned complaints by 13 claimants against Lontra Limited (in administration) arising out of an alleged failure to inform and consult. The hearing took place at Leeds by CVP on 14 April 2025 before Employment Judge White, with the respondent not in attendance.
The tribunal held that the claimants' complaints under section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, alleging non-compliance with section 188 of that Act, were well-founded. It therefore made a protective award in favour of the claimants.
The protective period was set at 90 days and commenced on 28 November 2023. The tribunal also recorded that the Recoupment Regulations apply. Reasons were given orally at the hearing, and no written reasons were to be provided unless requested in accordance with the note to the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trade union | Complaint under section 189 TULRCA 1992 that the respondent failed to comply with section 188 was found well-founded. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.189 TULRCA 1992
- s.188 TULRCA 1992
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.