Case 4102620/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G Connor other v Represented by: Mr D Martyn Solicitor — 2020
- Case reference
- 4102620/2020
- Decision date
- 21 October 2020
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge S MacLean
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr G Connor other
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment was issued under Rule 21 on the available material because no response had been presented. The respondent was in administration and did not appear; the administrators had confirmed by email that they did not object to the claims continuing and would not be entering the proceedings. The workplace was at 150 Howard Street, Glasgow, and there was no recognised trade union or representative body.
The tribunal recorded that Tracey McDowall and Hazel Berryman were made redundant on 22 February 2020 and 23 February 2020 respectively. The remaining 19 claimants were informed on 24 March 2020 that the respondent had ceased trading and that they were dismissed by reason of redundancy with immediate effect.
The complaint that the respondent failed to comply with its duty to consult under sections 188 and 188A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 was found to be well founded. The tribunal made a protective award under section 189 for 90 days' pay, using 22 February 2020 for Tracey McDowall, 23 February 2020 for Hazel Berryman, and 24 March 2020 for the remaining 19 claimants as the start dates.
The judgment also ordered the respondent to pay the appropriate remuneration to every employee of a description to which the award related pursuant to section 190 of the 1992 Act. No monetary total was stated in the judgment text supplied, so the award is recorded as a 90-day protective award rather than a quantified sum.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Collective protective award claim under sections 188 and 188A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. The tribunal found the complaint well founded and made a 90 days' pay protective award under section 189. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- sections 188 and 188A TULRCA 1992
- section 189 TULRCA 1992
- section 190 TULRCA 1992
- Rule 21 Employment Tribunal 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.