Case 2305088/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Antony Martyn v Clean Cold Power UK Limited (in administration) — 2025
- Case reference
- 2305088/2024
- Decision date
- 10 December 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lumby REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Antony Martyn
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal, sitting at Croydon by CVP before Employment Judge Lumby on 10 December 2025, considered a claim brought by Antony Martyn against Clean Cold Power UK Limited (in administration). The claimant appeared in person; the respondent did not attend.
The Tribunal found that the respondent had failed to collectively consult and to elect employee representatives in breach of section 188 of the Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. It ordered the respondent to pay the claimant a protective award of £60,290.70.
Reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing and written reasons will not be provided unless requested within 14 days. No further findings, panel members, or additional remedy components are recorded in the written judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trade union | Protective award under s.189 TULR(C)A 1992 for the respondent's failure to comply with collective consultation duties under s.188. | Upheld | — | £60,291 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £60,291
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 188 of the Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.