Case 4108425/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Ritchie v Arjowiggins Scotland Ltd (in administration) — 2023
- Case reference
- 4108425/2022
- Decision date
- 24 October 2023
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Robison
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Ritchie
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Employment Judge issued judgment on the available material under rule 21. The claimant was entitled to bring the claim because none of the situations in s.189(1)(a), (b) or (c) of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 applied. Although the respondent recognised Unite the Union in respect of manual workers, the claimant worked as Group Financial Controller and was not of a description covered by that collective agreement.
The claimant was dismissed as redundant on 30 November 2022 at Stoneywood Mill. The respondent was in administration, and the administrator consented to continuation of the proceedings by letter dated 18 January 2023. The response was struck out under Rule 37(1)(a) on 4 October 2023, although the respondent had stated an intention to defend the claim.
The tribunal found that the respondent proposed to dismiss as redundant more than 20 employees at one establishment, Stoneywood Mill, within 90 days or less. It held that the complaint that the respondent failed to comply with section 188 TULRCA 1992 by consulting affected employees before the first dismissal took effect was well founded.
The tribunal made a protective award in respect of the claimant. The respondent was ordered to pay remuneration for a protected period beginning on 30 November 2022 and lasting 90 days. No monetary figure for that remuneration was stated in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Protective award complaint under section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. The tribunal ordered remuneration for a 90-day protected period but did not quantify a monetary amount. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
- s.189(1)(a), (b) or (c) of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- Rule 37(1)(a)
- section 188 of the 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.