Case 2504238/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J McCauley v Gardner Aerospace - Consett Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 2504238/2019
- Decision date
- 20 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge SA Shore
- Venue
- North Shields Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J McCauley
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing on 12 December 2019, Employment Judge Shore considered Mr McCauley's application for interim relief arising from his dismissal by Gardner Aerospace Consett Limited. The tribunal held that he was likely to succeed in showing that the dismissal was for the reason, or principal reason, that he had taken part in the activities of an independent trade union at an appropriate time.
Having given the parties the usual explanation of the tribunal's powers in relation to interim relief, the judge made an order for continuation of the contract of employment under section 164 of the TULR(C) Act 1992. The judgment records no monetary award and does not determine the final merits of the underlying dismissal claim.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trade union | Interim relief application. The tribunal held the claimant was likely to succeed in showing that his dismissal was for the reason, or principal reason, that he had taken part in the activities of an independent trade union at an appropriate time, and it made a continuation order under section 164 of the TULR(C) Act 1992. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Section 164 of the TULR(C) Act 1992
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.