Mr G Roberts & others (See Schedule) v Calderprint Ltd (In Administration) and 1 other — 2020

The Tribunal issued judgment under Rule 21 because the first respondent had not presented a response and, on the information before the Judge, the protective award claims could be determined without a hearing. The first respondent was in administration and the administrators had consented to the claims proceeding; the second respondent was involved as a statutory guarantor under Part XII of the Employment Rights Act 1996.

The Tribunal found that the first respondent employed more than 20 employees at each of the two sites where the claimants worked, and that no trade union was recognised for collective bargaining, consultation or negotiation. Employees were told at a meeting on 24 May 2019 that the company was closing down and that they were being made redundant with immediate effect.

The Tribunal found there had been no proper warning, notice or consultation with the workforce, and no employee representatives had been elected or appointed for consultation under section 188A of the 1992 Act. It held that the first respondent was in breach of section 188 and made a protective award for the maximum protected period of 90 days from 24 May 2019. The judgment expressly did not affect three other complaints proceeding against the first respondent: unlawful deduction from wages, breach of contract relating to notice, and unfair dismissal.