Case 3305873/2023 · Employment Tribunal

Mr M Illingworth v Qube Qualifications and Development Limited (in Creditors Voluntary Liquidation) and 1 other — 2025

Case reference: 3305873/2023
Decision date: 19 February 2025
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Shastri-Hurst Date

Indexed: 25 April 2026

Parties

3 named

Claimant

Mr M Illingworth

Respondents

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

Employment Judge Shastri-Hurst upheld the claimant's complaint that the first respondent (in creditors' voluntary liquidation) failed to comply with s.188 TULRCA 1992 to consult on collective redundancies at its Abingdon premises, where there was no recognised trade union or employee representatives. A protective award was made for the protected period of 90 days (12.86 weeks) beginning 28 March 2023, in the sum of £6,677.30.

The complaint of breach of contract in relation to notice pay was well-founded; £1,766.12 (equivalent to four weeks' net pay) was awarded as damages. A further £19 was awarded for unpaid mileage expenses for the period 1 to 28 March 2023.

Credit is to be given for any sums paid by the Redundancy Payments Service in respect of these awards.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Trade union	Protective award under s.188 TULRCA 1992 for failure to consult on collective redundancies; protected period of 90 days (12.86 weeks) from 28 March 2023.	Upheld	—	£6,677
Breach of contract	Damages for breach of contract: £1,766.12 notice pay (4 weeks at net pay) and £19 mileage expenses (1-28 March 2023). Credit to be given for sums paid by the Redundancy Payments Service.	Upheld	—	£1,785

Remedy

Monetary award

Total award: £8,462; across all upheld claims

Legal tests applied

2 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.