Case 8001122/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Miss K Doran v Valve Components Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 8001122/2024
- Decision date
- 5 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge L Doherty
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss K Doran
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal issued judgment on the available material under Rule 21 because no response was presented within the applicable time limit. The claimant was entitled to bring the claim because it concerned a failure relating to the election of employee representatives and she was an employee dismissed as redundant.
The Tribunal found the complaint under section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 well founded. It found that the respondent dismissed as redundant more than 20 employees at one establishment within 90 days or less, and failed to ensure employee representatives were elected in accordance with section 188A and then consulted in accordance with section 188.
A protective award was made in respect of the claimant as an employee dismissed as redundant at the respondent's East Kilbride establishment. The respondent was ordered to pay remuneration for a protected period beginning on 5 July 2024 and lasting 90 days; no monetary figure was stated in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Protective award claim for failure to comply with collective redundancy consultation requirements under section 188 TULRCA 1992; the locked taxonomy has no specific protective award category. The judgment orders remuneration for a 90-day protected period but does not quantify a monetary amount. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
- section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- section 188A 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.