Case 1301250/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr. P. WARE AND 29 OTHERS (See schedule attached) v CORPORATE SOLUTIONS (LOGISTICS) LIMITED (in administration) — 2025
- Case reference
- 1301250/2023
- Decision date
- 14 February 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Manley
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr. P. WARE AND 29 OTHERS (See schedule attached)
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard 30 claims brought by Mr P. Ware and 29 others against Corporate Solutions (Logistics) Ltd (in administration) for failure to comply with the collective consultation duties in section 188 of TULRCA. The claims were presented in January 2023 after the respondent went into administration on 17 October 2022. No ET3 response was filed, and the administrators later conceded that the respondent dismissed 20 or more employees within a 90-day period, failed to consult or elect representatives under sections 188 and 188A, and relied on no special circumstances under section 189(6).
On the papers under Rule 22(2), the tribunal found that the claims were presented in time and that it had jurisdiction. It found that the claimants were dismissed by reason of redundancy on 17 October 2022, that more than 20 employees were employed at one establishment, that no recognised trade union existed, and that no attempt was made to elect representatives or consult before dismissal. The tribunal referred to section 189(1) and the decisions in Independent Insurance Co Limited v Aspinall and Northgate v Mercy on standing and time limits.
The tribunal held that the respondent failed to comply with sections 188 and 188A of TULRCA and that the complaints were well founded. Applying section 189(2) and (4) and the guidance in Susie Radin Limited v GMB and Others, it treated the 90-day maximum as the starting point. Because there had been no consultation, no attempt to comply with the statutory requirements, and no mitigating factors, it made protective awards for all claimants for a protected period of 90 days beginning on 17 October 2022.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | 30 claims for failure to consult / protective award under s.188 TULRCA; the tribunal made a protective award for each claimant. The judgment does not quantify the award as a monetary figure in the extracted text. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
15 references- s.188(1) TULRCA
- s.188(1A) TULRCA
- s.188(1B) TULRCA
- s.188(2) TULRCA
- s.188(7) TULRCA
- s.188A TULRCA
- s.189(1) TULRCA
- s.189(2) TULRCA
- s.189(4) TULRCA
- s.189(5) TULRCA
- s.189(6) TULRCA
- s.195(2) TULRCA
- Independent Insurance Co Limited v Aspinall [2011] IRLR 716
- Northgate v Mercy [2008] IRLR 222
- Susie Radin Limited v GMB and Others [2004] IRLR 400
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.