Case 4101219/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Budge v And others (listed on the attached schedule) DDP Contractors Ltd (In Liquidation) — 2023
- Case reference
- 4101219/2023
- Decision date
- 6 September 2023
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Whitcombe
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Budge
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment issued on the available material because no response was presented by the respondent within the applicable time limit. The respondent was in compulsory liquidation, but the relevant court granted permission for the proceedings to continue on 4 July 2023. The tribunal also recorded that the claimants were entitled to bring the claim because it concerned a failure relating to the election of employee representatives and the claimant was an employee dismissed as redundant.
The tribunal found that the complaint that the respondent failed to comply with section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 was well founded. It found that the respondent dismissed as redundant more than 20 employees at one establishment within a period of 90 days or less, and that it failed to carry out any consultation at all with the appropriate representatives of affected employees in accordance with s.188.
A protective award was made in respect of the claimants, who were employed at the respondent’s premises at Units 30 and 31, Logie Way, Logie Business Park, Kirriemuir, Angus. The protected period was set as 90 days beginning on 1 November 2022, and the tribunal ordered the respondent to pay remuneration for that protected period. The extracted text does not state the monetary amount of the award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Rule 21 judgment on a complaint under s.188 TULRCA 1992. The tribunal found the complaint well founded and made a protective award for a 90-day protected period, but the extracted text does not state a monetary amount. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
- section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 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.