Case 2601132/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Leanne Thackray & 21 others (schedule attached) First v Little Starts Nursery Limited (in administration) Second Respondent: Secretary of State for BEIS Record of a Hearing at the Employment Tribunal — 2024
- Case reference
- 2601132/2023
- Decision date
- 11 September 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hutchinson
- Venue
- Nottingham Heard
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Leanne Thackray & 21 others (schedule attached) First
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal found that the complaint that the first Respondent failed to comply with the requirements of section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 was well founded.
Employment Judge Hutchinson made a protective award for all Claimants employed at the premises at 15 Derby Road, Hilton, Derbyshire DE65 5FP. The judgment records that they were dismissed as redundant on or after 27 February 2023, and ordered the first Respondent to pay remuneration for a protective period of 90 days beginning on 27 February 2023.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trade union | The judgment states the first Respondent failed to comply with section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 and makes a protective award. It does not state individual monetary amounts. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.