Case 2500334/2023 · Employment Tribunal

Mr L Kay and others as named on the attached schedule v Tolent Construction Limited “In Administration” — 2024

Case reference: 2500334/2023
Decision date: 24 April 2024
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Arullendran Date

Indexed: 18 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr L Kay and others as named on the attached schedule

Respondent

Tolent Construction Limited “In Administration”

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The claimants brought claims for a protective award after the respondent entered administration on 13 February 2023. The respondent, through its administrator, said it did not intend to defend the claims and agreed to the lifting of the moratorium so the protective award claims could proceed.

The Tribunal found that the respondent proposed to dismiss as redundant 20 or more employees at Ravensworth House, 5th Avenue Business Park, Team Valley, Gateshead, with the first dismissal taking effect on 13 February 2023. It found there was no proper warning or consultation with a recognised trade union or the claimants, and no employee representatives had been elected or appointed for consultation.

The claims were held well-founded under section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. The Tribunal made a protective award for the maximum protected period of 90 days beginning on 13 February 2023, subject to the recoupment provisions referred to in the judgment.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Other	Protective award claim under section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 for failure to comply with section 188 collective consultation requirements. The judgment orders remuneration for 90 days but does not quantify a monetary amount.	Upheld	—	—

Legal tests applied

4 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.