Case 3202910/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss S Bewley Mr M Bowyer Mr G Bowyer Miss H Bowyer Miss L Burt Mr I Chokowry Mr B Disson Mr D Dunn Mr B Durrant-Peart Mr D Frost Mrs R Hannan Mr T Hughes Mr E Husband Miss D Kearey Mrs S Marrable Mr P Pritchard Mr L Wylie Mr K Mead Mr A Mitchell v SSG UK Specialist Ambulance Service Limited (In Administration) and 1 other — 2020
- Case reference
- 3202910/2019
- Decision date
- 24 September 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge McLaren Representation-
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Miss S Bewley Mr M Bowyer Mr G Bowyer Miss H Bowyer Miss L Burt Mr I Chokowry Mr B Disson Mr D Dunn Mr B Durrant-Peart Mr D Frost Mrs R Hannan Mr T Hughes Mr E Husband Miss D Kearey Mrs S Marrable Mr P Pritchard Mr L Wylie Mr K Mead Mr A Mitchell
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt with the matter on the papers. It declared that the respondent had acted in breach of section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992.
The tribunal awarded a protective award for each employee employed at the Rainham site who was made redundant on 4 September 2019. The protected period was 90 days starting on 4 September 2019.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trade union | The judgment makes a declaration of breach of section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 and awards a protective award; no monetary amount is stated. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 188 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.