Case 1808157/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms A Foers & 334 others (see attached schedule) v Tuffnells Parcels Express Limited (in administration) — 2025
- Case reference
- 1808157/2023
- Decision date
- 17 February 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Robertson Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms A Foers & 334 others (see attached schedule)
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found the claimants' complaints that Tuffnells Parcels Express Limited (in administration) failed to comply with section 188(1) of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 in relation to consultation about proposed dismissals were well-founded. The case involved 335 other claimants listed in the attached schedule.
The tribunal accordingly made a protective award under section 189 of the 1992 Act. It fixed the protected period at 90 days from 12 June 2023. The judgment also states that the Recoupment Regulations apply to the award.
No separate monetary amount is set out in the supplied judgment text, so no split award figure or total award can be recorded from the judgment itself.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trade union | Protective award claim arising from failure to comply with section 188(1) of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 about consultation on proposed dismissals. The tribunal made a protective award under section 189; the supplied judgment text does not state a separate monetary sum. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- section 188(1) of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- Recoupment Regulations
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.