Case 1802964/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr W Atkinson Miss K McDermott Mr M Guy Mr D Herbert v Shearings Limited (in administration) AT A HEARING — 2021
- Case reference
- 1802964/2020
- Decision date
- 17 February 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lancaster Representation
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr W Atkinson Miss K McDermott Mr M Guy Mr D Herbert
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that each claimant was assigned to a single establishment at Mill Lane, Normanton, and that more than 20 people were made redundant within a period of 90 days or less. It also found that the respondent failed to appoint or consult with any appropriate representatives. Each claimant was dismissed as redundant.
On those findings, the tribunal held that the complaints that the respondent had failed to comply with sections 188 and/or 188A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 were well founded. It therefore made a protective award and ordered the respondent to pay each claimant remuneration for a period of 90 days beginning on 2 May 2020. The judgment also recorded that the Employment Protection (Recoupment of Benefit) Regulations 1996 applied, so any award would be subject to recoupment procedures if relevant benefits had been received.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trade union | Protective award for failure to comply with ss.188 and/or 188A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. The judgment ordered remuneration for a period of 90 days beginning on 2 May 2020, but no monetary figure was stated in the extracted text. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- ss.188 and 188A TULRCA 1992
- Employment Protection (Recoupment of Benefit) Regulations 1996 regs. 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.