Mr S Fryatt v Harvard Technology Ltd (In Administration) and 1 other — 2019

The Tribunal dismissed the claim for a protective award against the First Respondent. The Claimant did not attend and did not make written representations; the First Respondent did not enter an appearance and did not attend. The Second Respondent made general written representations as a person interested in the proceedings but did not attend.

The Tribunal noted that an employee who has been or is proposed to be made redundant may be entitled to a protective award if there has been a failure to comply with section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. The Claimant was still employed when he presented his claim on 1 March 2019, and evidence from a linked case showed only that he had left before the final dismissals on 10 May 2019.

The Tribunal found that there was no evidence that the Claimant was made redundant, or even dismissed. It considered that he may have left for other employment or transferred to another company acquiring part of the First Respondent's business. Relying on Securicor Omega Express Ltd v GMB, it held that there is no entitlement to a protective award for those merely under threat of redundancy but not ultimately dismissed for that reason.