Case 4114763/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Unite The Union v Thomas Cook Airlines Ltd (In Compulsory Liquidation) — 2021
- Case reference
- 4114763/2019
- Decision date
- 26 July 2021
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Susan Walker
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Unite The Union
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Employment Judge issued judgment on the available material under rule 21 because no response had been presented within the applicable time limit. The claimant was entitled to bring the claim because it concerned a failure relating to representatives of a trade union and the claimant was the relevant union.
The respondent was in compulsory liquidation, but the relevant court had granted permission for the proceedings to continue on 4 February 2021. The Tribunal found that the complaint that the respondent failed to comply with a requirement of section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 was well founded.
The Tribunal made a protective award for affected employees employed at Glasgow Airport who were dismissed as redundant, or whom the respondent proposed to dismiss as redundant, and who fell within the recognised bargaining unit covered by the recognition agreement. The respondent was ordered to pay remuneration for a protected period beginning on 23 September 2019 and lasting 90 days.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trade union | The judgment found a complaint under section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 well founded and made a protective award. No monetary sum was specified; the protected period was 90 days from 23 September 2019. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
- 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.