Case 2218722/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Youngs Transportation and Logistics Ltd (In administration) — 2025
- Case reference
- 2218722/2024
- Decision date
- 5 June 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge A M Snelson sat in chambers on 30 May 2025 and decided the case on the papers. The respondent, Youngs Transportation and Logistics Ltd (in administration), did not present a response to the claims.
The tribunal held that the claimants' complaints of failure to comply with the collective consultation obligations prescribed by the Trade Union and Labour Relations Act 1992 were well-founded. The decision is a corrected judgment and applies to the claimants listed in the attached schedule, including Ms L Fulford and the other named claimants.
The tribunal ordered a protective award for each claimant under section 189(2) of the 1992 Act. The award was to be calculated by reference to each claimant's gross pay for the protected period of 90 days commencing on 22 January 2024. No single total monetary figure, or separate quantified sums for each claimant, is stated in the extracted text.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Protective award arising from failure to comply with collective consultation obligations under the Trade Union and Labour Relations Act 1992. The tribunal ordered remuneration for each claimant calculated by reference to gross pay for the 90-day protected period beginning 22 January 2024, but the extracted text does not state a lump-sum amount. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- TULRCA 1992 s.189(2)
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.