Case 4118144/2018 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4118144/2018 & others (as per multiple ref 8676) Mr A Ahmed & others v Crummock (Scotland) Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 4118144/2018
- Decision date
- 1 August 2019
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Muriel Robison
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4118144/2018 & others (as per multiple ref 8676) Mr A Ahmed & others
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningNo response was presented to the claims. The respondent was in liquidation, with joint liquidators appointed, and Sheriff KJ McGowan granted leave on 4 June 2019 for the claimants to commence proceedings against the respondent in liquidation. The Employment Judge therefore decided the case on the available material under rule 21.
The tribunal held that the complaint under section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 was well founded. It found that on or around 1 June 2018 the claimants were notified that their employment was coming to an end by reason of redundancy, and that no consultation or notice was given before their employment was terminated. It also found that the respondent dismissed more than 20 employees by reason of redundancy within a 90 day period, and that all the employees were based at the same establishment.
A protective award was made in respect of each claimant working at the respondent’s establishment at Butterfield Estate, Bonnybrigg, EH14 3JQ on 1 June 2018. The protected period was fixed at 90 days beginning on 1 June 2018. The extracted judgment text does not state a monetary sum for the award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Complaint under section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 for a protective award. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.188 TULRCA 1992
- Rule 21
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.