Case 1804724/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Harthan (counsel) For the v SH Structures Ltd (in administration) and Secretary of State for Business and Trade — 2025
- Case reference
- 1804724/2024
- Decision date
- 2 September 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Davies Appearances
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Harthan (counsel) For the
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing in Leeds on 2 September 2025, before Employment Judge Davies, the Tribunal dealt with claims brought by former employees of SH Structures Ltd (in administration) and the Secretary of State for Business and Trade. Claim 1804724/2024 was dismissed as a duplicate of claim 1804725/2024.
The Tribunal found that the First Respondent proposed to dismiss more than 20 employees as redundant at Moor Lane Trading Estate, Sherburn in Elmet. It recorded that there was no recognised trade union and that no employee representatives were appointed or elected.
On that basis, the Tribunal declared the complaints of failure to consult in respect of proposed dismissals contrary to s.188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 to be well-founded. It ordered remuneration for a protected period of 90 days from 4 April 2024 and recorded that the Employment Protection (Recoupment of Benefits) Regulations 1996 apply.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Claim 1804724/2024 was dismissed as a duplicate of claim 1804725/2024. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | The complaints of failure to consult in respect of proposed dismissals contrary to s.188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, brought by the forty-three individual former employees listed in the schedule, were declared well-founded. The First Respondent was ordered to pay remuneration for a protected period of 90 days from 4 April 2024, and the Employment Protection (Recoupment of Benefits) Regulations 1996 were stated to apply. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- Employment Protection (Recoupment of Benefits) Regulations 1996
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.