Case 1404995/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Devlin of Counsel For the v Sundeala Ltd (In Administration) — 2024
- Case reference
- 1404995/2023
- Decision date
- 9 September 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Devlin of Counsel For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Lewis Hall was employed by Sundeala Ltd as an Electrical Maintenance Technician (apprentice) from 14 September 2020 until 28 April 2023. The company entered administration on 6 April 2023, after which redundancies were made on several dates in April 2023, including the claimant's dismissal as redundant on 28 April 2023. The tribunal found that the dismissals were all from the same establishment at Middle Mill, Cam, Dursley, Gloucestershire, and that there was no recognised independent trade union and no employee representatives elected or appointed for collective consultation purposes.
The tribunal found that the respondent failed to undertake any, or any adequate, consultation with the claimant before the dismissals. Applying section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, including the requirements as to when consultation must begin, who must be consulted, and the matters to be disclosed and discussed, the tribunal held that the respondent had not complied with the statutory consultation obligations. The claimant's complaint that the respondent failed to comply with section 188 was therefore well founded.
The tribunal made a protective award in respect of the claimant and ordered the respondent to pay remuneration for the protected period of 90 days beginning on 28 April 2023. The judgment does not set out a single quantified monetary total in the extracted text, but it records the award period and includes the usual recoupment directions in the annex.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trade union | Protective award under section 188 TULRCA 1992 for failure to consult on proposed redundancies. The tribunal found the complaint well founded and ordered remuneration for a protected period of 90 days beginning on 28 April 2023, but the judgment does not state a quantified monetary sum. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.188 TULRCA 1992
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.