Case 8000540/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs P Robinson v Valve Components Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 8000540/2024
- Decision date
- 4 June 2025
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge L Doherty
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs P Robinson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Employment Judge issued judgment on the available material under rule 22 because no response had been presented within the applicable time limit. The respondent was in administration, and the administrator had consented to the continuation of the proceedings by letter dated 21 May 2024.
The Tribunal found that the claimant was entitled to bring the claim because it concerned a failure relating to the election of employee representatives and the claimant was an employee dismissed as redundant. It found that the respondent dismissed as redundant more than 20 employees at one establishment within a period of 90 days or less.
The complaint that the respondent failed to comply with section 188 or section 188A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 was well founded. The Tribunal found that the respondent failed to ensure that employee representatives were elected in accordance with section 188A and then to consult with them in accordance with section 188. A protective award was made for the claimant, with the protected period beginning on 15 March 2024 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 failure to comply with section 188 or section 188A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 and made a protective award. No monetary amount was specified. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- Rule 22 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
- section 188 Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- section 188A 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.