Case 3310900/2019 · Employment Tribunal
In Person For the First v Multi York Furniture Ltd (In Administration) and 2 others — 2019
- Case reference
- 3310900/2019
- Decision date
- 16 October 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Postle Appearances
- Venue
- Norwich
Parties
4 namedClaimant
In Person For the First
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Norwich on 16 September 2019, Employment Judge Postle heard Mr M Hobbs' claim against Multi York Furniture Limited (in administration) and the Secretary of State. The respondents did not attend and were not represented. The tribunal granted a declaration that the claimant's complaint that the respondent failed to comply with section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 was well founded.
The tribunal found that there should be a protected award paid to the affected employees at all affected sites of the respondent who were dismissed as redundant in November 2018, December 2018 and January 2019. It held that the protected period began with the date of the claimant's dismissal and lasted for 90 days.
The written record states that the claimants are to be paid remuneration for a period of 90 days pursuant to section 190(2) of the 1992 Act, and that the claimant is awarded 90 days' pay. The extracted judgment does not give a cash figure for the award, so no monetary total can be recorded from the text provided.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Protective award claim under section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. The tribunal granted a declaration that the complaint was well founded and said there should be a protected award for affected employees at all affected sites dismissed as redundant in November 2018, December 2018 and January 2019. The award was stated as 90 days' pay under section 190(2), but no monetary figure in pounds was set out in the extracted text. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.188 TULRCA 1992
- s.190(2) TULRCA 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.