Case 2600133/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Colin Worthington v Saint-Gobain Construction Products UK Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2600133/2022
- Decision date
- 16 August 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ahmed
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Colin Worthington
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing before Employment Judge Ahmed, sitting alone, the claimant Mr Colin Worthington’s complaint of detriment on grounds related to trade union membership or activities under section 146 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 was considered. The tribunal held that the complaint had no reasonable prospect of success.
Pursuant to Rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013, the complaint was struck out. The hearing listed for 7, 8 and 9 November 2022 was vacated. The written record notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested by a party within 14 days.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trade union | Complaint of detriment on grounds related to trade union membership or activities under section 146 TULRCA 1992; struck out at a preliminary hearing on the basis that it had no reasonable prospect of success under Rule 37. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- section 146 Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- Rule 37 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- no reasonable prospect of success
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.