Case 2303729/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss C Ibbotson (Counsel) For the v Mr J-P Van Zyl (Solicitor) — 2024
- Case reference
- 2303729/2023
- Decision date
- 10 April 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Wood Appearances
- Venue
- Remote CVP
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss C Ibbotson (Counsel) For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe nine Claimants were air traffic controllers employed by London Ashford Airport Limited and members of the trade union Prospect, which had been voluntarily recognised by the Respondent for collective bargaining on pay and holiday under an agreement dated 31 May 2018. Following unsuccessful pay-related discussions in late 2022 and early 2023, the Respondent gave notice on 16 January 2023 of its intention to terminate the recognition agreement and subsequently corresponded directly with staff on 21 February 2023 and 1 April 2023 making pay offers. The Claimants brought claims under section 145B of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992.
Applying the framework set out in Kostal UK Ltd v Dunkley [2021] UKSC 47, the Tribunal found that the preconditions of section 145B were made out. The Tribunal concluded that the Respondent's main, and probably sole, purpose in making the offers was to remove the obligation to have the Claimants' contractual pay terms determined by collective bargaining. The Judge found the reasons for de-recognition set out in the Respondent's solicitors' letter of 17 March 2023 to be unsupported by the contemporaneous evidence, and described Mr Hainsworth's evidence as unconvincing and at times evasive, preferring Mr Jary's evidence where there was a conflict.
Each offer attracted the statutory award of £4,554. The first, second, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth and ninth Claimants were each awarded £9,108 (two offers). Mr Hart (third Claimant) and Mr Hughes (fourth Claimant) were each awarded £4,554 (one offer each).
Claims and outcomes
9 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trade union | First Claimant (Glenn Robert Smith): s.145B TULR(C)A 1992 claim in relation to offers of 21 February 2023 and 1 April 2023. Two statutory awards of £4,554 each. | Upheld | — | £9,108 |
| Trade union | Second Claimant (Oliver Dowle): s.145B claim in relation to offers of 21 February 2023 and 1 April 2023. Two statutory awards of £4,554 each. | Upheld | — | £9,108 |
| Trade union | Third Claimant (Benjamin Hart): s.145B claim in relation to the offer of 21 February 2023 only. One statutory award of £4,554. | Upheld | — | £4,554 |
| Trade union | Fourth Claimant (Patrick Hughes): s.145B claim in relation to the offer of 1 April 2023 only. One statutory award of £4,554. | Upheld | — | £4,554 |
| Trade union | Fifth Claimant (Timothy Ian Maskens): s.145B claim in relation to offers of 21 February 2023 and 1 April 2023. Two statutory awards of £4,554 each. | Upheld | — | £9,108 |
| Trade union | Sixth Claimant (Nichola Jayne Merchant): s.145B claim in relation to offers of 21 February 2023 and 1 April 2023. Two statutory awards of £4,554 each. | Upheld | — | £9,108 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £72,864
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
4 references- section 145B Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- section 145D Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- Kostal UK Ltd v Dunkley and ors [2021] UKSC 47
- Ineos
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.