Case 3315368/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr K Traynor v NWC Realisations Ltd (in administration) — 2022
- Case reference
- 3315368/2020
- Decision date
- 24 February 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gumbiti-Zimuto Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr K Traynor
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant was employed by NWC Realisations Limited (in administration). On 3 September 2020, Rob Lewis and Rachel Wilkinson of PwC were appointed joint administrators. The claimant was dismissed for redundancy on 4 September 2020.
The tribunal found that the respondent did not fully inform and consult with the claimant in accordance with sections 188 and 188A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. The claimant brought a complaint under section 189 seeking a protective award for that failure.
Judgment was entered by consent. The tribunal made a protective award in the claimant's favour and ordered remuneration for the protected period of 90 days beginning 4 September 2020. Any part of the protected award not paid by the Redundancy Payment Service would rank as an ordinary unsecured claim in the administration.
The claimant agreed to withdraw any claim for unpaid wages, holiday pay, notice pay, redundancy payments, and unfair dismissal. The tribunal made no order for costs or fees, each party bearing its own costs and fees.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trade union | Complaint under section 189 TULRCA 1992 for a protective award after the respondent did not fully inform and consult under sections 188 and 188A. The tribunal awarded a protected period of 90 days beginning 4 September 2020, but no monetary figure was stated in the extracted text. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- sections 188 and 188A TULRCA 1992
- section 189 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.