Case 4104289/2020 · Employment Tribunal

M r G Stich v Hendersons of Hanover Street (In Liquidation) — 2021

Case reference: 4104289/2020
Decision date: 1 June 2021
Jurisdiction: Scotland
Judge: Employment Judge P O’Donnell

Indexed: 22 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

M r G Stich

Respondent

Hendersons of Hanover Street (In Liquidation)

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

This was a Rule 21 judgment issued on the available material because no response was presented within the applicable time limit. The Employment Judge held that the claimant was 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 the complaint under section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 to be well founded. It found that the respondent had dismissed as redundant more than 20 employees at one establishment within a period of 90 days or less, and that it failed to ensure employee representatives were elected in accordance with section 188A and then to consult with them in accordance with section 188.

A protective award was therefore made in respect of the affected employees. The protected period began on 31 May 2020 and lasted for 90 days. The extracted judgment does not state a monetary total or a per-employee sum.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Trade union	Rule 21 judgment on the available material. The complaint under s.188 TULR(C)A 1992 was held well founded and a protective award was made for a protected period of 90 days beginning on 31 May 2020. No monetary sum was stated in the extracted text.	Upheld	—	—

Legal tests applied

3 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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.