Case 4104827/2020 · Employment Tribunal

Ms A McNaught v STA Travel Limited (in liquidation) — 2021

Case reference: 4104827/2020
Decision date: 15 December 2021
Jurisdiction: Scotland
Judge: Employment Judge R Gall

Indexed: 19 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Ms A McNaught

Respondent

STA Travel Limited (in liquidation)

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The Tribunal found that the respondent failed to comply with section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. The claimant was made redundant on 02 September 2020, and the Tribunal accepted evidence from other claimants that her employment situation mirrored theirs, in circumstances where no ET3 or defence had been lodged.

The Tribunal found that there was no recognised trade union, no elected employee representatives, and no individual consultation. It also found that the respondent's stores were not separate establishments for the purposes of the 1992 Act, and that more than 100 employees were made redundant on 02 September 2020.

Applying the authorities referred to in the judgment, the Tribunal concluded that there had been no consultation whatsoever and no special circumstances justifying a reduction from the 90-day starting point. It made a protective award requiring the respondent to pay remuneration to the claimant for the protected period from 02 September 2020 to 01 December 2020.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Other	Protective award claim under sections 188 and 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. The award was expressed as remuneration for a 90-day protected period, not as a quantified monetary sum.	Upheld	—	—

Legal tests applied

5 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.