Case 4102732/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G Laing v And others set out in the attached schedule Dovetail Enterprises (1993) Limited (In Administration) — 2025
- Case reference
- 4102732/2025
- Decision date
- 28 March 2025
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Kemp
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr G Laing
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Kemp issued a Rule 22 judgment on the available material. The respondent, which was in administration, did not contest the claims. The joint administrators consented to the claims proceeding so that the claimants could pursue a protective award. The tribunal recorded that the respondent dismissed 20 or more employees at one establishment, at Dunsinane Industrial Estate, Dunsinane Avenue, Dundee, on dates from 28 to 31 March 2025, and that the claimants were dismissed on 28 March 2025.
The tribunal found that the respondent failed to ensure employee representatives were elected in accordance with section 188A and then failed to consult with them in accordance with section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. It held that the complaint of failure to comply with section 188 was well founded and made a protective award in respect of the claimants as employees dismissed as redundant.
The protected period was 90 days beginning on 28 March 2025. The judgment states that the respondent was ordered to pay remuneration for that protected period, but the extracted text does not set out a monetary total or any claimant-by-claimant allocation.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Protective award for failure to comply with collective redundancy consultation duties under sections 188 and 188A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. The extracted text does not state a separate monetary sum. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.188 TULRCA 1992
- s.188A 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.