Case 2300448/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G Bedwell v CNH2016 Ltd (In Liquidation) — 2024
- Case reference
- 2300448/2018
- Decision date
- 10 June 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ramsden Dated
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr G Bedwell
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal dealt only with the Claimant’s complaint that the Respondent was in breach of section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 and that he should receive a protective award under section 189. By a letter dated 3 April 2019, the Tribunal told the Claimant that the complaint appeared to have no reasonable prospect of success because a protective award had already been made in respect of a claim brought by GMB Trade Union, and invited representations or a request for a hearing.
The Claimant did not make representations, or did not make sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. The Tribunal therefore struck out that protective award complaint. The judgment states that the Claimant’s remaining complaints for notice pay, arrears of pay, and failure to pay accrued but untaken holiday were not affected by this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trade union | The complaint under section 188 TULRCA 1992, seeking a protective award under section 189, was struck out because a protective award had already been made in respect of a claim brought by GMB Trade Union, and the Claimant did not make representations or request a hearing after the Tribunal's letter of 3 April 2019. | Struck out | — | — |
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.