Case 2303315/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Howard Hunt (City) Ltd (in administration) — 2020
- Case reference
- 2303315/2019
- Decision date
- 21 April 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Martin Dated
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy consent and following settlement between the parties, with no admission of fault or liability, the tribunal granted permission for the claims listed in the schedule to proceed against Howard Hunt (City) Limited (in administration) and lifted the moratorium in relation to them. The schedule attached to the judgment listed 166 claimants.
The tribunal made a protective award pursuant to section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 in respect of the listed claimants and ordered the respondent to pay remuneration for a protected period of 56 days from 30 April 2019, the date on which the first dismissals to which the complaint related took effect. It also recorded that, after submission and acceptance of a valid proof of debt, a listed claimant could prove for a dividend in the administration estate as an unsecured creditor only, without affecting any claim against the Secretary of State for payment of the protective award. There was no order as to costs.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Consent judgment following settlement between the parties with no admission of fault or liability. The tribunal made a protective award pursuant to section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 and ordered remuneration for a protected period of 56 days from 30 April 2019. | Settled | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 64
- section 189 TULRCA 1992
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.