Case 4107359/2024 · Employment Tribunal
P Bird & Others v Axis Productions Limited (In Administration) — 2025
- Case reference
- 4107359/2024
- Decision date
- 9 May 2025
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge D Hoey
Parties
2 namedClaimant
P Bird & Others
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal decided the case on the available material under rule 22 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024. It recorded that no response had been presented within the applicable time limit, and that although the respondent was in administration, the administrator had consented to the proceedings continuing by email dated 17 January 2025.
It found the complaints under sections 188 and 188A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 to be well founded. The respondent had dismissed more than 20 employees as redundant at one establishment within 90 days or less, failed to ensure that employee representatives were elected in accordance with section 188A, and then failed to consult with those representatives under section 188.
The tribunal made a protective award for employees based at 8 Elliot Place, Glasgow G3 8EP. The protected period began on 15 July 2024 and lasted 90 days, and the respondent was ordered to pay remuneration for that protected period. No separate monetary amount is stated in the extracted text.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Protective award claim under ss.188 and 188A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992; the tribunal found the complaints well founded and ordered remuneration for the protected period, but no separate monetary figure is stated in the extracted text. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- Rule 22 Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
- s.188 Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- s.188A Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 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.