Case 2501079/2020 · Employment Tribunal

Mr P Riley & others (please see schedule) v Shepherd Cox Hotels (Hartlepool) Ltd (In Administration) — 2021

Case reference: 2501079/2020
Decision date: 25 June 2021
Jurisdiction: England & Wales

Indexed: 21 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr P Riley & others (please see schedule)

Respondent

Shepherd Cox Hotels (Hartlepool) Ltd (In Administration)

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The tribunal found that the complaint that the respondent failed to comply with section 188 or section 188A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 was well-founded. It therefore made a protective award in favour of the employees named in the schedule who were dismissed as redundant on or after 5 June 2020.

The judgment states that remuneration is to be calculated in accordance with section 190 of TULRCA 1992 for the protected period. The protected period was fixed as 5 June 2020 to 3 September 2020.

The judgment also records that the Employment Protection (Recoupment of Jobseekers Allowance and Income Support) Regulations 1996 apply. It notes the respondent's duty under regulation 6 to provide information to the Secretary of State and explains that regulation 7 postpones the award to allow for any recoupment notice under regulation 8.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Other	Protective award under section 188 or section 188A TULRCA 1992. The tribunal ordered remuneration under section 190 for employees dismissed as redundant on or after 5 June 2020 whose names appeared on the schedule, for the protected period 5 June 2020 to 3 September 2020. No individual monetary figure is stated in the extracted judgment text.	Upheld	—	—

Legal tests applied

4 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.