Case 4100019/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Newman & others as per attached schedule v Centre for the Moving Image (In Administration) — 2023
- Case reference
- 4100019/2023
- Decision date
- 25 May 2023
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Sangster
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Newman & others as per attached schedule
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal issued a Rule 21 judgment on the available material. No response had been presented within the applicable time limit, and the administrator of Centre for the Moving Image consented to the continuation of the proceedings by letter dated 18 January 2023.
The tribunal found that the claimant was entitled to bring the claim because none of the situations in s.189(1)(a), (b) or (c) of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 applied, and the claimant was an employee dismissed as redundant. It also found that the respondent dismissed as redundant more than 20 employees at one establishment within a period of 90 days or less.
On liability, the tribunal held that the complaint of failure to comply with s.188 of the 1992 Act was well founded because the respondent carried out no consultation at all with the appropriate representatives of affected employees. It therefore made a protective award in respect of each claimant and ordered the respondent to pay remuneration for the protected period.
The protected period was fixed as beginning on 6 October 2022 and lasting for 90 days. The extracted judgment does not state the cash amount of the award, so no monetary breakdown is recorded here.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Protective award under s.188 TULRCA 1992; the judgment ordered payment of remuneration for the protected period but did not state a monetary figure in the extracted text. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- Rule 21 ET Rules 2013
- s.188 TULRCA 1992
- s.189(1)(a)-(c) 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.