Case 2207186/2018 · Employment Tribunal

Mr A Shellum, counsel Case Number: 2207186/2018 For the v Mr J Moore, solicitor — 2018

Case reference: 2207186/2018
Decision date: 24 September 2018
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Joffe
Venue: London Central
Panel members: Ms P Breslin, Mr M Reuby

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr A Shellum, counsel Case Number: 2207186/2018 For the

Respondent

Mr J Moore, solicitor

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The tribunal held that the claimants' complaints under sections 188, 188A and 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 were well founded. It made protective awards in favour of the claimants for a protected period of 90 days beginning 24 September 2018. The judgment records that the sums are to be calculated in accordance with section 190 of the 1992 Act.

The written record states that reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested. It also records that the Employment Protection (Recoupment of Jobseeker's Allowance and Income Support) Regulations 1996 apply, including the respondent's duty to provide information to the Secretary of State and the postponement of payment pending any recoupment notice.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Other	Protective award claim under sections 188, 188A and 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. The judgment does not state the individual monetary sums; it says the sums must be calculated in accordance with section 190.	Upheld	—	—

Legal tests applied

5 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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.