Case 2410257/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Brownlee v Think Aggregates & Recycling Ltd (in Administration) — 2024
- Case reference
- 2410257/2022
- Decision date
- 12 January 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Franey
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Brownlee
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningIn the absence of a response form contesting the claim, and with the administrators of the respondent having consented to the claim proceeding, the tribunal gave judgment under rule 21. It found that Think Aggregates & Recycling Ltd (in Administration) failed in its duty to consult collectively with the workforce under section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, and held that the complaint seeking a protective award was well-founded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Protective award under section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. The tribunal found the respondent failed in its duty to consult collectively with the workforce. It ordered payment of remuneration for the protected period of 90 days beginning with 3 October 2022, but no monetary figure is stated in the extracted judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- rule 21
- section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- Employment Protection (Recoupment of Benefits) Regulations 1996
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.