Case 2303399/2022 · Employment Tribunal

Miss S Hennessy v Eaglemoss Ltd (in Administration) — 2024

Case reference: 2303399/2022
Decision date: 21 March 2024
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Aspinall Date

Indexed: 21 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Miss S Hennessy

Respondent

Eaglemoss Ltd (in Administration)

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The claim was issued in the London South Employment Tribunals on 26 September 2022. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge determined the claim under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.

The tribunal found that the respondent was in breach of s.188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. It therefore awarded the claimant a protective award under s.189 of that Act. The protected period was 90 days beginning on 05 August 2022, described as the date on which the first dismissal to which the complaint related took effect.

The amount of the protective award was £7,050.64. No separate breakdown of remedies was provided beyond that figure.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Trade union	Default judgment under rule 21. The tribunal found the respondent was in breach of s.188 TULRCA 1992 and granted a protective award under s.189 TULRCA 1992 for a protected period of 90 days beginning 05 August 2022.	Upheld	—	£7,051

Remedy

Monetary award

Total award: £7,051; across all upheld claims

Legal tests applied

3 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.