Case 2418257/2020 · Employment Tribunal
1. Mr A Carter & others (see schedule) 2. Mr T Armstrong & others (see schedule) 3. Miss M Bate & others (see schedule) 4. Mr A Aslam and others (see schedule) v Cruden Construction Limited (in administration) and 3 others — 2022
- Case reference
- 2418257/2020
- Decision date
- 1 February 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ainscough REPRESENTATION
Parties
5 namedClaimant
1. Mr A Carter & others (see schedule) 2. Mr T Armstrong & others (see schedule) 3. Miss M Bate & others (see schedule) 4. Mr A Aslam and others (see schedule)
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal found the claimants' complaints under section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 well-founded in respect of the first and second respondents' failure to comply with the requirements of section 188 of that Act.
It ordered the first respondent to pay a protective award to the first, second and third groups of claimants equivalent to remuneration for 90 days beginning on 31 July 2020. It ordered the second respondent to pay the fourth group of claimants the same 90-day protective award from 31 July 2020.
The claims against the third respondent were dismissed. The fourth respondent, the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, was joined as an interested party and did not contest the claims. The Employment Protection (Recoupment of Jobseeker's Allowance and Income Support) Regulations 1996 apply to the awards.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Protective award complaints under section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 for failure by the first and second respondents to comply with section 188 were found well-founded. | Upheld | — | — |
| Other | The claims against the third respondent were unsuccessful and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- section 189(3) 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.