Case 2414552/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Nicola Burridge v Sonetik UK Ltd (In voluntary liquidation) — 2020
- Case reference
- 2414552/2019
- Decision date
- 4 August 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phil Allen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Nicola Burridge
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment was issued under Rule 21 because the respondent had not presented a response to the claims and, on the information before the Judge, it was possible to issue judgment without a hearing.
The Tribunal found that the respondent failed to comply with its statutory collective consultation obligations under section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 before proposed redundancy dismissals took effect at its Astra Business Centre establishment in Preston in respect of the whole workforce employed there. The claim for failure to consult was therefore well founded.
The Tribunal made a protective award under sections 189(1)(d), (2), (3) and (4), ordering the respondent to pay remuneration to the claimant for a protected period of 90 days beginning on 25 September 2019. The judgment also stated that the Employment Protection (Recoupment of Jobseeker's Allowance and Income Support) Regulations 1996 apply to the protective award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment found the claim for failure to consult well founded and made a protective award for a 90-day protected period. The locked taxonomy has no specific protective award or collective consultation claim type, so this is classified as other. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 - Rule 21
- Section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- Sections 189(1)(d), (2), (3) and (4) of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- Employment Protection (Recoupment of Jobseeker's Allowance and Income Support) 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.