Case 4111771/2021 · Employment Tribunal
ETZ 4(WR) EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4111771/2021 & Others (All as per Attached Schedule) Employment Judge: M A Macleod Mr L Bruce & Others v (All as per Attached Schedule) The People’s Energy Company Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 4111771/2021
- Decision date
- 10 October 2022
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Murdo Macleod
Parties
2 namedClaimant
ETZ 4(WR) EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4111771/2021 & Others (All as per Attached Schedule) Employment Judge: M A Macleod Mr L Bruce & Others
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal recorded, by consent, that the claimants were employed by the respondent at its Wester Shawfair site and were dismissed by reason of redundancy within the same 90-day period, with the first dismissal taking effect on 28 September 2021. The respondent had informed the claimants of the need for redundancies and appointed employee representatives, but it was unable to inform and consult with the claimants to the full extent required by sections 188 and 188A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 because of the supplier of last resort process.
On that basis, the claimants brought a complaint under section 189 of the 1992 Act seeking a protective award. The tribunal held that the claims were well founded and succeeded. It fixed the protected period at 8 weeks, with each claimant entitled to remuneration for that period.
The judgment also recorded that the protective award payments were not to be treated as an expense of the administration or paid by the joint administrators, and that entitlement to the payments was to rank and be distributed in due course in accordance with the insolvency legislation and rules. No order as to expenses was made.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Collective protective award complaint under s.189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 arising from a failure to inform and consult over proposed redundancies. The tribunal recorded that the claims were well founded and succeeded, and fixed the protected period at 8 weeks. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- s.188 TULR(C)A 1992
- s.188A TULR(C)A 1992
- s.189 TULR(C)A 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.