Case 4105839/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Elliot v Beyard Services Limited (In Liquidation) — 2025
- Case reference
- 4105839/2024
- Decision date
- 29 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge S MacLean
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Elliot
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal issued judgment on the available material under rule 22 because no response was presented within the applicable time limit. It recorded that the respondent was in compulsory liquidation and that the relevant court granted permission for the continuation of the proceedings on 27 January 2025. The claimant was entitled to bring the claim because it concerned a failure relating to the election of employee representatives, and the claimant had been dismissed as redundant.
The tribunal found that the respondent dismissed as redundant more than 20 employees at one establishment within a period of 90 days or less. It further found that the respondent failed to ensure that employee representatives were elected in accordance with section 188A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, and then failed to consult with them in accordance with section 188. The complaints were held to be well founded.
A protective award was made in respect of employees based at 2B Wellington Street, Paisley, PA3 2JQ. The protected period was stated to begin on 22 March 2024 and to last for 90 days. The judgment did not state a separate monetary total or split any remuneration figure by individual claim.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Protective award / collective consultation claim under sections 188 and 188A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992; no separate monetary amount was stated in the judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- Rule 22 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
- section 188 TULRCA 1992
- section 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.