Case 2408548/2022 · Employment Tribunal

Mr D Smith v Lancaster Packing Ltd (in Creditors Voluntary Liquidation) — 2023

Case reference: 2408548/2022
Decision date: 28 November 2023
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Cookson Date

Indexed: 21 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr D Smith

Respondent

Lancaster Packing Ltd (in Creditors Voluntary Liquidation)

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The claimant, Mr D Smith, brought a claim for a protective award for breach of the collective consultation requirements. No response was presented by the respondent, Lancaster Packing Ltd (in Creditors Voluntary Liquidation), and the Tribunal determined the matter under Rule 21 on the material before it.

The Tribunal found that the respondent was placed into creditors voluntary liquidation on 22 August 2022, that the claimant was dismissed on 6 August 2022 with immediate effect, and that more than 20 employees were dismissed on or around the same date at an establishment employing approximately 30 people. It found no evidence that a trade union was recognised for collective bargaining, consultation or negotiation, and no evidence that employee representatives had been elected or appointed for section 188A consultation.

The Tribunal held that there had been no proper warning, notice or consultation with the workforce, and that the respondent was in breach of section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. It made a protective award under section 189 for the maximum protected period of 90 days. The judgment states that the Employment Protection (Recoupment of Jobseeker’s Allowance and Income Support) Regulations 1996 apply, and it also records that no financial award was quantified at this stage; the claimant would need to pursue payment and any amount dispute separately under section 192.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Other	Protective award under sections 188 and 189 TULRCA 1992. No monetary sum was quantified in the judgment. The operative paragraph says the 90-day protected period begins on 5 August 2022, while the reasons say it commences on 22 August 2022.	Upheld	—	—

Legal tests applied

6 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.

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.