Case 2303760/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Smith & Others v GX Technology EAME Limited (in liquidation) and 1 other — 2023
- Case reference
- 2303760/2022
- Decision date
- 19 April 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dyal Representation
- Venue
- London South
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr P Smith & Others
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that the First Respondent was in breach of the duty to consult employee representatives contrary to s.188 Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992.
The employees dismissed by the First Respondent by reason of redundancy on 26 August 2022, including all claimants identified in the schedule, were held entitled to a protective award under s.189 TULRCA 1992. The First Respondent was ordered to pay remuneration for a protected period of 90 days beginning on 26 August 2022, with individual award amounts set out in the schedule.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Protective award for breach of the duty to consult employee representatives under s.188 TULRCA 1992, with remuneration ordered for a protected period of 90 days under s.189. Remedy amount is the sum of the individual protective awards in the schedule. | Upheld | — | £492,728 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £492,728
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.188 Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- s.189 Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.