Case 3300071/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs R Harding v Animal Health Trust (In Liquidation) — 2021
- Case reference
- 3300071/2021
- Decision date
- 1 November 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Laidler Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs R Harding
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal made a Rule 21 judgment in favour of Mrs R Harding against Animal Health Trust (In Liquidation). It declared that the respondent failed to comply with its obligations to consult with the claimant within the meaning of section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour (Consolidation) Act 1992.
The judgment records that Mrs Harding was dismissed as redundant on or around 31 July 2020. On that basis, the tribunal ordered the respondent to pay remuneration to the claimant for the protected period, which it identified as 90 days. The extracted text does not state a monetary sum for that remuneration.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment records a declaration that the respondent failed to comply with its consultation obligations under section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. It also states that the claimant was dismissed as redundant on or around 31 July 2020 and that remuneration was ordered for a protected period of 90 days, but no monetary figure is set out in the extracted text. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour (Consolidation) Act 1992
- Rule 21 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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.