Case 6021173/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Frank Stedman v Reflections Print Finishers Ltd and 1 other — 2025
- Case reference
- 6021173/2025
- Decision date
- 6 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Yardley Representation
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Frank Stedman
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal found the complaint under section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 to be well-founded. The respondent did not attend the hearing.
The Tribunal ordered Reflections Print Finishers Ltd to pay the claimant a protective award equivalent to 90 days' remuneration from 26 February 2025. The claimant's gross weekly pay was found to be £679.89, producing an award of £8,743.39. The Employment Protection (Recoupment of Jobseeker's Allowance and Income Support) Regulations 1996 apply to the award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Complaint under section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 was found well-founded, with a protective award ordered. | Upheld | — | £8,743 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £8,743
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
3 references- section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- section 189(3) of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- ss 220 to 229 Employment Rights Act 1996
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.