Case 2603463/2019 · Employment Tribunal

Mr K Dhanda and others v Simons Construction Limited (in administration) and 2 others — 2021

Case reference: 2603463/2019
Decision date: 22 July 2021
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Ahmed On

Indexed: 19 May 2026

Parties

4 named

Claimant

Mr K Dhanda and others

Respondents

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

This was a consent judgment under Rule 64. The tribunal recorded that the Schedule 1 claimants were employed by the respondent indicated for each claimant, either Simons Construction Limited (in administration) or Simons Group Limited (in administration). Claims against any other respondent were dismissed on withdrawal, except in relation to the Secretary of State.

For the claimants named in Schedule 2, Simons Construction Limited (in administration) failed to adequately comply with a requirement of section 188 of the Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, and the section 189 protective award claim succeeded. For the claimants named in Schedule 3, the same finding and outcome were recorded against Simons Group Limited (in administration).

Each respondent was ordered to pay remuneration to the relevant successful claimants for a protected period of 90 days beginning on 31 October 2019. The protective award claims of the Schedule 4 claimants were left to proceed to a full hearing, and all other claims by the Schedule 1 claimants remained stayed.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

This case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Other	Protective award claims under sections 188 and 189 of the Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 succeeded for the claimants named in Schedules 2 and 3. The award was remuneration for a protected period of 90 days beginning on 31 October 2019, but no monetary amount was specified.	Upheld	—	—
Other	All claims by the Schedule 1 claimants against any respondent other than their identified employer were dismissed on withdrawal, save for claims against the Third Respondent. Other claims remained stayed and were not adjudicated.	Withdrawn	—	—

Legal tests applied

3 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.