Case 2406930/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Prospect Trade Union v 1) NEOS Nuclear Limited (in Administration) 2) New Engineering Limited (in Administration) — 2024
- Case reference
- 2406930/2023
- Decision date
- 16 September 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Batten
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Prospect Trade Union
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing in Manchester on 16 September 2024, Employment Judge Batten, sitting alone, heard the claim with the claimant represented and no attendance for the respondents. The tribunal found that the first and second respondents failed to inform or consult the claimant, as the recognised trade union, about the transfer of employees' employment from the first respondent to the second respondent on or about 21 March 2023.
The failure was found under Regulation 13 and/or 13A of the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006. The judgment records that the respondents were ordered to pay each of the claimant's affected members 13 weeks' gross pay for that default.
The tribunal did not quantify the individual awards in the judgment itself. Instead, it directed the claimant to file, by 4.00pm on Monday 14 October 2024, a list of the affected employee-members with their average gross weekly pay and the amount of 13 weeks' gross pay for each person, so that a further judgment could be issued for the sums payable to each affected employee.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Transfer of undertakings (TUPE) | The tribunal found that the first and second respondents failed to inform or consult the claimant, as recognised trade union, about the transfer of employees' employment from the first respondent to the second respondent on or about 21 March 2023, under Regulation 13 and/or 13A of the TUPE Regulations 2006. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Regulation 13 TUPE 2006
- Regulation 13A TUPE 2006
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.