Case 1403466/2023 · Employment Tribunal

Mr O Ghaffoor, Solicitor For the First v Fiennes Restoration Ltd (In Administration) and 1 other — 2024

Case reference: 1403466/2023
Decision date: 27 February 2024
Jurisdiction: England & Wales

Indexed: 18 May 2026

Parties

3 named

Claimant

Mr O Ghaffoor, Solicitor For the First

Respondents

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The tribunal found that the 24 claimants were employees of Fiennes Restoration Ltd at Broughton Poggs Business Park and were dismissed as redundant on 1 February 2023. The first respondent employed approximately 36 staff at that location and all 36 employees were dismissed by reason of redundancy on the same day.

The first respondent did not recognise an independent trade union and there were no employee representatives at the workplace. The tribunal found that the first respondent failed to undertake any or any adequate consultation with the claimants before the dismissals.

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. The tribunal made a protective award for the 24 claimants and ordered the first respondent to pay remuneration for the protected period of 90 days beginning on 1 February 2023.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Other	Protective award claim for failure to comply with section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. The tribunal ordered remuneration for a protected period of 90 days but did not state a monetary amount.	Upheld	—	—

Legal tests applied

7 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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.