Case 3325866/2017 · Employment Tribunal

1. In person 2. Did not attend 3. Did not attend For the v Respondent — 2019

Case reference: 3325866/2017
Decision date: 13 March 2019
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Alliott Appearances
Venue: Watford

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

1 named

Claimant

1. In person 2. Did not attend 3. Did not attend For the

Respondent

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The case was heard as a Rule 21 preliminary hearing because the respondent, Photocorporation (UK) Limited (in liquidation), did not attend and no response had been presented. Employment Judge Alliott found the first claimant's complaint under section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 well founded and ordered a protective award of £6,975.

The second claimant's section 188 complaint was also found well founded, and she was awarded a protective award of £5,028. Those two awards were the only quantified monetary orders made in the judgment.

The third claimant's section 188 complaint was likewise found well founded, but the tribunal did not yet make a protective award because it required the claimant to send details of his gross weekly pay within 14 days of the order. The judgment therefore left that claim established in principle, with quantification pending further information.

Claims and outcomes

3 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Redundancy	Complaint of failure to comply with section 188 TULR(C)A 1992; tribunal ordered a protective award of £6,975.	Upheld	—	£6,975
Redundancy	Complaint of failure to comply with section 188 TULR(C)A 1992; tribunal ordered a protective award of £5,028.	Upheld	—	£5,028
Redundancy	Complaint of failure to comply with section 188 TULR(C)A 1992 was found well founded, but the tribunal directed the claimant to provide details of gross weekly pay within 14 days before making a protective award.	Upheld	—	—

Remedy

Monetary award

Total award: £12,003; across all upheld claims

Legal tests applied

1 reference

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.