Case 2413300/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Ormes v Laterooms Limited (in administration) — 2022
- Case reference
- 2413300/2020
- Decision date
- 21 January 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Benson Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Ormes
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr D Ormes brought a claim against Laterooms Limited (in administration) that fell within the protective award jurisdiction. The tribunal first recorded that the claim had not been presented within the relevant time limit, but held that it was not reasonably practicable to present it in time and that it had been presented within a further reasonable period, so the tribunal had jurisdiction to consider it.
Because the respondent had not presented a valid response and there was no attendance for the respondent, the matter proceeded under Rule 21. The tribunal found that the respondent failed to consult with the claimant as a person who may be affected by proposals to dismiss, or measures taken in connection with the dismissal of, 20 or more employees, contrary to s.188(1) of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992.
The tribunal therefore held that the claimant was entitled to a protective award. It stated that the award was for a protected period of 90 days from 2 August 2019. The judgment did not quantify any payment at this stage and explained that a protective award is a two-stage process: the tribunal gives entitlement first, and any payment issue is then dealt with separately, including by a further claim under s.192 if necessary.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Protective award claim under s.188(1) TULRCA 1992. The tribunal found the claim was out of time but accepted it was not reasonably practicable to present it within the time limit and that it was presented within a further reasonable period. No financial amount was quantified in this judgment; the tribunal recorded entitlement to a protective award for a protected period of 90 days from 2 August 2019, with payment to be pursued separately under s.192 if required. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- Rule 21
- not reasonably practicable
- s.188(1) TULRCA 1992
- s.192 TULRCA 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.