Case 3200221/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Simon Allpress and 15 further Claimants as per the Schedule v Coco Lighting Limited (in voluntary liquidation) — 2025
- Case reference
- 3200221/2025
- Decision date
- 27 November 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Carpenter Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Simon Allpress and 15 further Claimants as per the Schedule
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal found that the complaint that the Respondent failed to comply with the requirements of section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 was well founded. The judgment records that the Claimants listed in the schedule were employees of the Respondent who were dismissed as redundant on 20 January 2025.
The Tribunal made a protective award in respect of the scheduled Claimants. The Respondent was ordered under section 189(3) of the 1992 Act to pay the Claimants remuneration for the protected period of 90 days beginning on 20 January 2025. Reasons were given orally and no written reasons are included in the text provided.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Protective award complaint under section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. The judgment orders remuneration for a 90-day protected period but does not state a quantified monetary amount. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- section 189(3) 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.