Case 3311929/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr L Purdy & Others (see attached schedule) v KETTLE HOME Ltd (In Creditors Voluntary Liquidation) and 1 other — 2025
- Case reference
- 3311929/2024
- Decision date
- 17 June 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Foxwell Date
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr L Purdy & Others (see attached schedule)
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimants were employed at the respondent's establishment at 5 Macadam Road, Earlstrees Industrial Estate, Corby, and were made redundant on 9 October 2024. The tribunal found that 20 or more employees at that establishment were made redundant or placed at risk of redundancy on or within 90 days of 9 October 2024, and that there was no recognised trade union or elected employee representatives at the establishment.
The tribunal found that the claimants were dismissed during that period without any consultation having taken place. Neither respondent filed a response, and the tribunal considered that it would be disproportionate to convene a hearing.
The tribunal held that the respondent had failed to comply with section 188 of the Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 and that the claim for a protective award succeeded. It made a protective award for claimants who worked at the Corby establishment and were dismissed as redundant on or after 9 October 2024, covering a protected period beginning on 9 October 2024 for 90 days, with the Recoupment Regulations applying.
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 & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992; no monetary figure was quantified in the judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- section 188 of the Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- section 189(5)(b) of the Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- protective awards are punitive and should be for the maximum period unless there are circumstances making it just not to do so
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.