Case 2408394/2022 · Employment Tribunal
S Turner N Young J Carter v NCRQ Ltd (in Administration) — 2023
- Case reference
- 2408394/2022
- Decision date
- 7 September 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Batten
Parties
2 namedClaimant
S Turner N Young J Carter
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal held that the claimants' complaints presented under section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, concerning the respondent's failure to comply with section 188, were well-founded. Employment Judge Batten sat alone at the Manchester video hearing. The respondent, NCRQ Ltd (in Administration), did not attend.
The tribunal ordered a protective award under section 189(3) of the 1992 Act to pay the claimants who were dismissed by reason of redundancy on or after 7 October 2022 an amount equivalent to remuneration for the 90-day period beginning on that date. The judgment also states that the Recoupment Regulations apply.
All other claims brought by the claimants were dismissed upon withdrawal. The judgment does not set out a single monetary total for the protective award; it records the award by reference to the 90-day protected period and includes the standard recoupment annex.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Complaint under section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 for failure to comply with section 188 collective consultation requirements. The tribunal found the complaint well-founded and made a protective award equivalent to remuneration for a 90-day period beginning on 7 October 2022. No separate monetary figure was stated in the judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- s.188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- s.189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- s.189(3) of the 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.