Case 1400030/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Ms J M Ward plus 14 further Claimants as per the Schedule v HBS Group Southern Limited (in administration) and 1 other — 2026
- Case reference
- 1400030/2025
- Decision date
- 23 January 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge J Bax Representation
- Venue
- Bristol
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Ms J M Ward plus 14 further Claimants as per the Schedule
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal held that the complaint that the first respondent failed to comply with section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 was well founded. It made a protective award in favour of the claimants listed in the Schedule, who were employees of HBS Group Southern Limited at Unit 9, 1 Solent Way, Whiteley, Hampshire and who were dismissed as redundant on or after 4 October 2024.
The award was for remuneration for a protected period of 90 days beginning on 4 October 2024. The first respondent and the second respondent did not attend the hearing. The judgment records that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days of sending of the written record.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Protective award under section 188 TULRCA. The tribunal ordered remuneration for a protected period of 90 days beginning on 4 October 2024 for the claimants listed in the Schedule; no separate monetary figure was stated in the extracted text. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 188 TULRCA
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.