Case 3300102/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs T Hayden v Animal Health Trust (In Liquidation) — 2021
- Case reference
- 3300102/2021
- Decision date
- 1 November 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Laidler Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs T Hayden
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningActing under Rule 21, the tribunal declared that Animal Health Trust (In Liquidation) failed to comply with its obligations to consult Mrs T Hayden within the meaning of section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour (Consolidation) Act 1992. The decision records that the matter was dealt with on the papers and that the respondent did not comply with the consultation obligation identified in the judgment.
The judgment also records that Mrs T Hayden was dismissed as redundant on or around 31 July 2020. As a consequence of the failure to consult, the tribunal ordered the respondent to pay remuneration to the claimant for the protected period, which the judgment states was 90 days. The extracted text does not give a monetary amount for that award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The tribunal made a declaration that the respondent failed to comply with its obligations to consult the claimant within section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour (Consolidation) Act 1992. The extracted text does not state a monetary figure for the remuneration ordered for the protected period of 90 days. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.188 of the Trade Union & 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.