Case 1308433/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Brown and 9 others (see attached Schedule) v Almor Limited (in administration) — 2025
- Case reference
- 1308433/2022
- Decision date
- 21 February 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Connolly
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Brown and 9 others (see attached Schedule)
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent was correctly served, the administrators consented to the claims proceeding, and no response was received. The tribunal decided the matter in chambers on the basis of written representations from the claimants' representative.
The tribunal found that, because there was no recognised trade union or employee representatives, the individual claimants listed in the schedule had standing to bring the claim. It held that the complaint that the respondent failed to comply with section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 as to collective consultation was well-founded and succeeded.
The tribunal made a protective award for each claimant, ordering the respondent to pay remuneration for the protected period of 90 days beginning on 11 July 2022, the date on which the first dismissals to which the complaints related took effect. The judgment states that the Employment Protection (Recoupment of Benefits) Regulations 1996 apply to the award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trade union | The judgment describes a complaint that the respondent failed to comply with section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 as to collective consultation, and makes a protective award. No fixed monetary amount is stated; the award is remuneration for the protected period of 90 days for each claimant. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- Employment Protection (Recoupment of Benefits) Regulations 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.