Case 2400994/2025 · Employment Tribunal

Mr B Beardmore and others (see schedule) v Tomkinson Heating Ltd (in creditors voluntary liquidation) Interested Party: Secretary of State for Business and Trade — 2025

Case reference: 2400994/2025
Decision date: 12 June 2025
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Franey

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr B Beardmore and others (see schedule)

Respondent

Tomkinson Heating Ltd (in creditors voluntary liquidation) Interested Party: Secretary of State for Business and Trade

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The tribunal dealt with claims by Mr B Beardmore and the other claimants named in the schedule for a protective award under section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. It recorded that the respondent had failed to present a valid response on time and that the interested party neither supported nor resisted the claims, so a determination could properly be made under rule 22 of the Employment Tribunals Procedure Rules 2024.

The tribunal held that the claims were well-founded because the respondent failed in its duty to consult the claimants under section 188 TULRCA 1992. It therefore made a protective award in favour of each claimant.

The award was for remuneration for a protected period of 90 days starting on 30 January 2025, being the date the first dismissal took effect. The judgment also states that the recoupment regulations apply to the protective awards.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Other	Protective award claims under s.189 TULRCA 1992 for the claimants listed in the schedule were found well-founded. The tribunal held that the respondent failed in its duty to consult under s.188.	Upheld	—	—

Legal tests applied

4 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.