Case 3201562/2024 · Employment Tribunal

1. Mr A Madzima & 47 others (see attached schedule) 2. Mr G Kelley & 3 others (see attached schedule) v Tevva Motors Limited (In Administration) and 1 other — 2024

Case reference: 3201562/2024
Decision date: 28 June 2024
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Burgher

Indexed: 17 May 2026

Parties

3 named

Claimant

1. Mr A Madzima & 47 others (see attached schedule) 2. Mr G Kelley & 3 others (see attached schedule)

Respondents

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The judgment was made by consent after a joint application by or on behalf of the claimants named in the schedule and the First Respondent. It records that, for the scheduled claimants' protective award claims, the First Respondent failed to adequately comply with a requirement of section 188 or section 188A of the Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992.

The protective award claim under section 189 succeeded. The First Respondent was ordered to pay remuneration to the claimants for a protected period of 56 days beginning on 28 June 2024, with any payments by the First Respondent to be treated as a non-preferential unsecured dividend subject to the usual preferential debt categories. All other claims against the respondents were dismissed on withdrawal, and there was no order for costs or fees.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Trade union	Protective award claims under section 189 of the Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 succeeded by consent. The First Respondent was ordered to pay remuneration for a protected period of 56 days beginning on 28 June 2024.	Upheld	—	—
Other	The judgment states that all other claims against the Respondents were dismissed on withdrawal, but does not identify those claims.	Withdrawn	—	—

Legal tests applied

4 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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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.