Case 4110750/2018 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4110750/2018 & others as per attached multiple schedule 8521 Mrs S McGee & others v As per multiple schedule 8521 Balmoral Knitwear (Scotland) Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 4110750/2018
- Decision date
- 1 April 2019
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Laura Doherty
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4110750/2018 & others as per attached multiple schedule 8521 Mrs S McGee & others
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that the claimants were employed by Balmoral Knitwear (Scotland) Limited and that administrators were appointed on 14 February 2018. It further found that the claimants were dismissed by reason of redundancy on that date.
The tribunal recorded that the respondent did not inform and consult with the claimants in accordance with s.188 and s.188A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. On that basis, the claimants brought a complaint under s.189 of the Act seeking a protective award.
By consent of the parties, the tribunal held that the claims were well founded and made a protective award in favour of the claimants. The judgment orders remuneration for a protected period of 8 weeks from 14 February 2018. The extracted text does not state a monetary figure for the award, and notes that the claimants agreed to seek payment from the Insolvency Service.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Protective award claim under s.189 TULRCA 1992 arising from failure to inform and consult under s.188 and s.188A. The tribunal declared the claims well founded and made a protective award for a protected period of 8 weeks from 14 February 2018. No monetary sum was stated in the extracted text. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- s.188 TULRCA 1992
- s.188A TULRCA 1992
- s.189 TULRCA 1992
- Rule 64
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.