Case 3315485/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs M Vincent v Animal Health Trust (In Liquidation) — 2021
- Case reference
- 3315485/2020
- Decision date
- 1 November 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Laidler Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs M Vincent
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Laidler determined the matter on the papers under Rule 21. The tribunal declared that Animal Health Trust (In Liquidation) failed to comply with its obligations to consult with Mrs M Vincent within the meaning of section 188 of the Trade Union & Labour (Consolidation) Act 1992.
The judgment records that Mrs M Vincent was dismissed as redundant on or around 31 July 2020. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay remuneration to her for the protected period, which was identified as 90 days. The extracted text does not state the monetary amount of that remuneration, so only the existence and length of the protected-period award can be recorded from the judgment extract.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The tribunal made a declaration that the respondent failed to comply with its consultation obligations within section 188 of the Trade Union & Labour (Consolidation) Act 1992. It also ordered remuneration for the protected period of 90 days, but no monetary figure is stated in the extracted text. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 188 of the Trade Union & Labour (Consolidation) Act 1992
- Rule 21 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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.