Case 2602652/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr B Barnard v Timber Stair Manufacturers Ltd and 1 other — 2024
- Case reference
- 2602652/2023
- Decision date
- 25 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Butler
- Venue
- Nottingham
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr B Barnard
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was determined on the papers under Rule 21 after the first Respondent failed to submit a response. The Employment Judge considered the claim form and submissions from the Claimant and the Second Respondent.
The Tribunal found that the Claimant worked at a single establishment where there was no recognised trade union. It found that the first Respondent failed to organise the election of employee representatives and failed to consult with them in accordance with sections 188 and 188A of TULRCA.
The complaints under TULRCA section 189 were held to be well founded and succeeded. The first Respondent was ordered to pay remuneration to the Claimant for a protected period of 90 days beginning on 12 August 2023, with the recoupment regulations applying to the awards.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trade union | The judgment describes complaints pursuant to TULRCA section 189 concerning failure to organise election of employee representatives and consult under sections 188 and 188A. It orders remuneration for a protected period of 90 days but gives no monetary amount. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 Rule 21
- sections 188 and 188A TULRCA
- TULRCA section 189
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.