Case 2502522/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs S Devennie v Short Richardson and Forth Limited In Voluntary Liquidation — 2023
- Case reference
- 2502522/2022
- Decision date
- 4 July 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Arullendran Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs S Devennie
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal entered judgment under Rule 21 because the respondent did not present a response. The liquidator had informed the tribunal that he did not intend to admit or defend the claim after the respondent entered voluntary liquidation.
The tribunal found that on 5 September 2022 the respondent informed employees that it would cease providing legal services after 30 September 2022 and proposed to dismiss 20 or more employees at its Newcastle office as redundant. It found there was no proper warning or consultation with a recognised trade union or with the claimant, and no employee representatives had been elected or appointed. On that basis, the tribunal held that the respondent was in breach of section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 and made the maximum protective award for a 90-day protected period beginning on 30 September 2022.
The tribunal also found that the claimant was entitled to payment for 20.14 days of accrued but untaken annual leave. After crediting a partial payment already made by the Redundancy Payment Services, it awarded £1,621.57 net for holiday pay. It further found that the claimant was entitled to three months' contractual notice pay, had received none, and had been summarily dismissed on 30 September 2022, so it awarded £9,774.21 net for wrongful dismissal. No award was made for pension contributions because that issue was being dealt with by Clumber Consultancy.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Protective award claim under sections 188 and 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. The tribunal awarded 90 days' remuneration from 30 September 2022, but did not quantify the amount in money terms in the judgment text. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Regulation 14 Working Time Regulations 1998 claim for accrued but unpaid annual leave, after deducting a partial payment already made by the Redundancy Payment Services. | Upheld | — | £1,622 |
| Wrongful dismissal | The tribunal found the claimant was entitled to 3 months' contractual notice pay and had been summarily dismissed without notice on 30 September 2022. | Upheld | — | £9,774 |
Legal tests applied
5 references- Rule 21 Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
- section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- Regulation 14 of the Working Time Regulations 1998
- 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.