Case 2413605/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Whalley and 22 others (see schedule) v The Bliss Space (Southport) Ltd (In Voluntary Liquidation) — 2020
- Case reference
- 2413605/2020
- Decision date
- 31 December 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Franey
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment in a multi-claimant case brought by Mr Vincent Whalley and 22 others against The Bliss Space (Southport) Limited (In Voluntary Liquidation). The tribunal held that the claim for a protective award was well founded because the respondent failed in its duty to consult the claimants under section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay each claimant remuneration for the protected period of 90 days from 19 May 2020. The judgment does not set out individual monetary amounts, but it records that the protective award is subject to the recoupment regulations.
The judgment also notes the annex on recoupment of benefits and states that the hearing listed for 4 January 2021 was cancelled. No other claims or remedies are identified in the judgment text.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment records a well-founded claim for a protective award under section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. It orders remuneration for each claimant for the protected period of 90 days from 19 May 2020, but it does not state a single split monetary figure for the individual claims. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- 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.