Case 2205220/2020 · Employment Tribunal

Claimant v Debenhams Retail Limited (in Administration) — 2022

Case reference: 2205220/2020
Decision date: 22 December 2022
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Broughton Date

Indexed: 19 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Respondent

Debenhams Retail Limited (in Administration)

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The claimants listed in the annex were employed by Debenhams Retail Limited at its Market Street, Manchester store. The respondent entered administration on 9 April 2020, and the claimants were dismissed by reason of redundancy on 14 August 2020.

The claimants brought a protective award complaint under section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, alleging failure to consult in accordance with sections 188 and 188A. The tribunal found that the claimants were assigned to an establishment where 20 or more redundancies were proposed within 90 days and that the respondent did not fully inform and consult with them as required.

The tribunal ordered a protected period of 90 days from 14 August 2020. It stated that protective award payments would rank as unsecured claims in the respondent's insolvency, with some potentially recoverable from the Redundancy Payments Service, and made no order for costs or fees.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Trade union	Protective award complaint under section 189 TULRCA 1992 for failure to inform and consult in accordance with sections 188 and 188A. Judgment states the protected period should be 90 days from 14 August 2020, but gives no monetary amount.	Upheld	—	—
Other	The judgment states that, to the extent claim forms may have intimated any other claims, they would stand dismissed automatically 14 days after the date of the order unless specified with administrator consent. It is unclear from the judgment whether any such additional claims existed or were later pursued.	Other	—	—

Legal tests applied

3 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.