Case 1401125/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Miss M Williams v Bespoke Hotels Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 1401125/2021
- Decision date
- 14 February 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Matthews Representation
- Venue
- Plymouth
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss M Williams
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss Melanie Williams worked as Conference and Banqueting Manager at The Duke of Cornwall Hotel. The respondent employer dismissed around 56 employees as redundant on 2 February 2021 and entered creditors voluntary liquidation on 12 February 2021. The tribunal found that the company did not recognise a trade union, had no elected or appointed employee representatives with authority to be consulted, and made no arrangements to elect such representatives.
On the protective award claim, the tribunal held that the respondent was proposing to dismiss 20 or more employees at one establishment within 90 days, that it had not complied in any respect with its consultation obligations under section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, and that the special circumstances defence was not engaged because there had been no consultation at all. The claim was well founded and the tribunal made a declaration and ordered a protective award for the full 90-day protected period.
The claimant's breach of contract claim also succeeded. The tribunal found that she was entitled to 12 weeks' notice under her contract, that no notice had been given, and that she should be paid 12 weeks' net pay. The judgment calculated that amount at £4,349.76, with no deduction for tax.
The judgment's recoupment section records a total monetary award and prescribed element for the notice-pay award, with the prescribed element running from 2 February 2021 to 27 April 2021 and no excess over that element. The extracted text does not state a separate cash figure for the 90-day protective award, so the award is recorded by entitlement rather than by quantified sum in this extraction.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Protective award under s.189 TULRCA; the tribunal found the complaint well founded, held that the respondent had not complied with s.188, rejected any special circumstances defence, and ordered a 90-day protected period. The extracted judgment does not state a separate cash figure for this award. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Claim for notice pay succeeded. The tribunal awarded 12 weeks' net pay, calculated as 12 x £362.48, with no deduction for tax. | Upheld | — | £4,350 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,350
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
4 references- s.188 TULRCA
- s.189 TULRCA
- special circumstances defence
- just and equitable 90-day protective award
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.