Case 1804401/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Lowe v SUK Retail Limited and 1 other — 2020
- Case reference
- 1804401/2019
- Decision date
- 16 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Maidment Representation
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr D Lowe
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal found that there was a shortfall of £525 in the statutory redundancy payment made by the Second Respondent to Mr Lowe, and ordered that amount to be paid to him.
The Tribunal also found that the First Respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from Mr Lowe's wages in respect of accrued but untaken holiday entitlement as at the termination of his employment, relating to holiday accrued after the First Respondent's insolvency. The First Respondent was ordered to pay the gross sum of £488.96.
On the protective award claim, the Tribunal accepted that the First Respondent proposed to dismiss as redundant 20 or more employees at its Doncaster store within 90 days or less, with the headcount supplemented by employees who had previously worked at its Sheffield store. It declared that the First Respondent failed to comply with sections 188 and 188A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, and made a protective award requiring the First Respondent to pay remuneration to Mr Lowe for 90 days beginning on 20 June 2019.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The judgment records a shortfall in the statutory redundancy payment made by the Second Respondent. | Upheld | — | £525 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment describes this as an unauthorised deduction from wages in respect of accrued but untaken holiday entitlement after the First Respondent's insolvency. | Upheld | — | £489 |
| Other | Protective award for failure to comply with sections 188 and 188A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992; the judgment orders remuneration for 90 days but does not state a monetary figure. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- sections 188 and 188A 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.