Case 1805659/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Rosehill Press Ltd (in voluntary liquidation) — 2020
- Case reference
- 1805659/2020
- Decision date
- 17 December 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent, Rosehill Press Limited (in voluntary liquidation), failed to present a response to the claims. The tribunal recorded that the claimants then submitted further information following the tribunal's order of 17 December 2020, and that the Joint Liquidator also sent information in response to that order.
The tribunal found that the respondent failed to comply with sections 188 and 188A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. It declared the claims for protective awards well-founded for the named claimants who had been employed at the respondent's premises at Bradmarsh Way, Bradmarsh Business Park, Rotherham, and who were dismissed as redundant on 8 September 2020.
A protective award was made with the protected period beginning on 8 September 2020 and lasting 90 days. The tribunal said it was just and equitable to make the maximum award because there had been a complete failure to comply with the statutory requirements for collective consultation. The recoupment provisions were stated to apply in respect of all claimants except the second claimant.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trade union | Protective award claim under sections 188 and 188A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. The judgment states that the claims for protective awards were well-founded and that a 90-day protected period was ordered from 8 September 2020. The OCR text is slightly garbled in the sentence about recoupment, but it indicates that recoupment provisions applied to all claimants except the second claimant. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- section 188 TULRCA 1992
- section 188A TULRCA 1992
- just and equitable
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.