Case 3315178/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Nikolay Avramov v BAM Construct UK Limited and 1 other — 2021
- Case reference
- 3315178/2020
- Decision date
- 21 October 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge G Tobin Representation
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr Nikolay Avramov
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Preliminary Hearing (Open) before Employment Judge G Tobin to consider whether any claim should be struck out or made subject to a deposit order. The judge declined to consider strike-out, citing late withdrawal of the claimant's solicitor and late provision of documents/submissions by both respondents (which the judge formally cautioned against). The judge held that three TUPE-related allegations had little reasonable prospect of success: the automatic unfair dismissal under regulation 7 TUPE 2006 against the first respondent, and the failure to inform and consult under regulation 13 TUPE 2006 against both respondents. After enquiring into the claimant's means, deposit orders of £400 per allegation (totalling £1,200) were imposed as a condition of continuing to advance them. The judge declined to make further case management orders pending the joining of related new proceedings.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Transfer of undertakings (TUPE) | Preliminary hearing only. Three TUPE-related allegations subjected to deposit orders of £400 each (out of a possible maximum £1,000) on grounds of having little reasonable prospect of success: (i) automatic unfair dismissal under reg.7 TUPE 2006 against R1; (ii) failure to inform/consult representatives under reg.13 TUPE 2006 against R1; (iii) failure to inform/consult representatives under reg.13 TUPE 2006 against R2. Substantive claims of unfair dismissal, redundancy payment and direct race discrimination not affected. PDF text was truncated; confidence reduced accordingly. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- Rule 39 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- Regulation 7 TUPE 2006
- Regulation 13 TUPE 2006
- overriding objective of rule 2
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 4 PDF on gov.uk
Published on gov.uk under the .
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.