Case 2300848/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G Bedwell v CNH2016 Ltd (In Liquidation) and 1 other — 2024
- Case reference
- 2300848/2018
- Decision date
- 10 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ramsden
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr G Bedwell
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal struck out the claimant's complaint for a protective award under section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992.
The Tribunal had written to the claimant on 12 June 2024 giving him an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing on why the protective award complaint should not be struck out because it had no reasonable prospect of success. The claimant did not make sufficient representations, so the complaint was struck out.
The judgment expressly states that the claimant's remaining complaints for a redundancy payment, notice pay and arrears of pay were not affected by this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The struck-out complaint was for a protective award under section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. The judgment states that the claimant's remaining complaints for a redundancy payment, notice pay and arrears of pay were not affected by this judgment. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- no reasonable prospect of success
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.