Case 2601454/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Alison Kerr & Miss Courtney Kerr v The Izaak Walton Hotel (Dovedale) Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2601454/2020
- Decision date
- 6 July 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phillips Members
- Venue
- Nottingham
- Panel members
- Mr C Tansley, Mr J Akhtar
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Alison Kerr & Miss Courtney Kerr
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the case at Nottingham on 6 July 2021 before Employment Judge Phillips with lay members Mr C Tansley and Mr J Akhtar. The claimants were Miss Alison Kerr and Miss Courtney Kerr, represented by Miss A Kerr, and the respondent was represented by Mr T Davie, Director.
The tribunal dismissed the claim for redundancy pay, recording that it was not well founded. No further reasoning is set out in the written record provided.
The tribunal found that the respondent failed to comply with section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. It therefore ordered the respondent to pay each claimant remuneration for the protected period of 90 days starting on 21 March 2020. The written record does not quantify the monetary amount of that protective award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | Protective award under section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay each claimant remuneration for the protected period of 90 days starting on 21 March 2020, but the judgment does not quantify the sum. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.188 TULR(C)A 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.