Case 2400898/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Whelan & others (see attached schedule) v Pure Legal Ltd (in administration) and 2 others — 2022
- Case reference
- 2400898/2022
- Decision date
- 30 August 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge KM Ross
Parties
4 namedClaimant
Mr M Whelan & others (see attached schedule)
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal gave judgment under Rule 21. It found that Mr Whelan's complaint, and the complaints of all claimants listed in the attached schedule, that the second respondent failed to comply with section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 were well founded.
The Tribunal ordered the second respondent to pay a protective award under section 189(3) of the 1992 Act to Mr Whelan and all scheduled claimants who were dismissed for redundancy from 2 November 2021. The award was remuneration for 90 days beginning on 2 November 2021. The judgment stated that the Recoupment Regulations apply.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Protective award complaint: the Tribunal found that the second respondent failed to comply with section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 Rule 21
- section 188 Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- section 189(3) Trade Union and 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.