Case 2418018/2020 · Employment Tribunal

Claimant v Debenhams Retail Limited (in Administration) — 2022

Case reference: 2418018/2020
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 tribunal found that the claimants were assigned to an establishment where 20 or more redundancies were proposed within a 90-day period. It found that the respondent did not fully inform and consult with the claimants in accordance with s.188 and s.188A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992.

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 insolvency, though some payments might be recoverable from the Redundancy Payments Service. No costs or fees order was made.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Other	Protective award complaint under section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 for failure to inform and consult under s.188 and s.188A. The judgment does not state a monetary amount.	Upheld	—	—

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.