Case 1804296/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms R Ludlow and others (see attached schedule) v IDMH Ltd t/a Lighthouse (in administration) — 2025
- Case reference
- 1804296/2024
- Decision date
- 7 November 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Miller Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms R Ludlow and others (see attached schedule)
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimants brought complaints under section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 alleging that the respondent failed to comply with the requirements of section 188A of the 1992 Act. The respondent did not attend the hearing.
The Tribunal held that the complaints succeeded. It ordered the respondent to pay a protective award to the employees at the listed Sheffield premises who were included in the schedule, consisting of remuneration for 90 days beginning on 22 March 2024. The judgment also stated that the Recoupment Regulations apply.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Complaints under section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 for failure to comply with section 188A succeeded. The tribunal made a protective award of 90 days' remuneration from 22 March 2024 for employees listed in the schedule, but no monetary figure was stated. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- section 188A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- section 189(3) of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 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.