Case 4110247/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr N Rennie (Deceased) v Richard Irvin & Sons Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 4110247/2021
- Decision date
- 31 August 2021
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge D Hoey
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr N Rennie (Deceased)
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal held that it was not reasonably practicable for the claim to have been presented in time and that it was lodged within such further period as was reasonable, so the tribunal had jurisdiction under section 189(5) of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. The judgment was made by consent under Rule 64 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
The tribunal found that a protective award should be paid limited to Mr Neil Rennie (Deceased), who had been employed by the respondent, Richard Irvin & Sons Limited (In Administration). The protected period was stated to begin on the date of dismissal, 19 December 2018, and to run for 90 days. The judgment stated that the claimant was to be paid remuneration for that 90-day period pursuant to section 190 of the 1992 Act.
No monetary figure for the award is set out in the judgment, and there was no order as to expenses.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Judgment records a protective award under sections 189(5) and 190 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. The judgment does not state a monetary figure for the award. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- section 189(5) of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- Rule 64 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- section 190 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.