Case 4102800/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Stevenson v The Underwater Centre (In Administration) — 2019
- Case reference
- 4102800/2019
- Decision date
- 10 October 2019
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Robison
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Stevenson
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment records, by consent, that the claimants listed in the attached schedule were employed by the respondent, The Underwater Centre (In Administration). It further records that on 19 October 2018 joint administrators were appointed and that the claimants were dismissed by reason of redundancy on the same date.
The tribunal found that the respondent did not inform and consult with the claimants in accordance with sections 188 and 188A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. It recorded that the claimants had brought complaints under section 189 seeking a protective award.
The tribunal declared the claims justified, made a protective award in favour of the claimants, and ordered the respondent to pay remuneration for a protected period of eight weeks beginning on 19 October 2018. The judgment does not state a quantified monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Protective award claim under section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, following admitted failures to inform and consult under sections 188 and 188A. The judgment is by consent and orders remuneration for an eight-week protected period from 19 October 2018; no monetary total is stated. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
7 references- s.188 TULRCA 1992
- s.188A TULRCA 1992
- s.189 TULRCA 1992
- s.195 TULRCA 1992
- The Bakers’ Union v Clarks of Hove Ltd [1978] IRLR 366
- In re Hartlebury Printers Ltd and others (in liquidation) [1992] ICR 559
- Susie Radin Limited v GMB [2004] IRLR 400
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.