Case 1804376/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Bonds Heavy Castings Ltd (in administration) and Secretary of State for Business Energy and Industrial Strategy — 2021
- Case reference
- 1804376/2020
- Decision date
- 3 March 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Little REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedKey findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal held that Mr Grady's complaint for a protective award was well founded because the duty to consult under section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 had been breached. It therefore made a protective award in respect of his dismissal as redundant, with a protected period of 90 days beginning on 27 December 2019. The judgment states that the recoupment regulations do not apply.
Mr Mather's complaint was initially out of time, but the tribunal found it was not reasonably practicable for him to present the claim in time because he had hoped to join the union multiple claim and, through a failure of communication, was not able to do so. The tribunal also took into account the extension for ACAS conciliation and treated 21 August 2020 as a reasonable date of presentation.
Mr Mather's complaint was also found well founded. As with Mr Grady, the tribunal awarded a protective period of 90 days beginning on 27 December 2019 and stated that the recoupment regulations do not apply. The judgment does not set out any monetary figure for the award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Mr Grady's complaint was for a protective award arising from a breach of the collective consultation duty under TULRCA 1992 s.188. The tribunal found the complaint well founded and made a protective award for a 90-day protected period beginning on 27 December 2019; recoupment regulations did not apply. | Upheld | — | — |
| Other | Mr Mather's complaint was also for a protective award. Although it was presented out of time, the tribunal found it was not reasonably practicable to present it in time because he had hoped to join the union's multiple claim and was prevented by a communication failure, and it also took into account the ACAS conciliation extension. The complaint was found well founded and a 90-day protected period beginning on 27 December 2019 was awarded; recoupment regulations did not apply. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- TULRCA 1992 s.188
- not reasonably practicable to present in time
- ACAS conciliation extension
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.