Case 2500982/2022 · Employment Tribunal

Scott Wright v SE-Tek Ltd (in administration) — 2023

Case reference: 2500982/2022
Decision date: 12 July 2023
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Jeram

Indexed: 20 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Scott Wright

Respondent

SE-Tek Ltd (in administration)

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The judgment was entered pursuant to rule 21. The tribunal held that Mr Wright's complaint under s.189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 succeeded, on the basis that SE-Tek Ltd (in administration) had failed adequately to comply with a requirement of s.188. The claim for a protective award also succeeded.

The respondent was ordered to pay remuneration for a protected period of 90 days beginning on 30 June 2022, the date on which dismissal took effect. No monetary figure was stated in the judgment, and the Employment Protection (Recoupment of Benefits) Regulations 1996 were stated to apply to the award.

All claims other than the successful protective award claim were struck out as not actively pursued. The judgment also recorded that neither the administrator's consent nor the court's permission had been obtained for the proceedings to be instituted or continued as required by the Insolvency Act 1986.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

This 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 complaint under s.189 TULRCA 1992 for failure adequately to comply with a requirement of s.188 succeeded; the protected period was 90 days from 30 June 2022.	Upheld	—	—
Other	The judgment states that all other claims were struck out as not actively pursued, but does not identify those claims in the extracted text.	Struck out	—	—

Legal tests applied

5 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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.