Case 2603159/2021 · Employment Tribunal
1. UNITED ROAD TRANSPORT UNION 2. MR C BONSER & OTHERS 3. GRALEY & OTHERS 4. OWEN & OTHERS 5. MALPASS & OTHERS 6. INDIVIDUAL CLAIMANTS LISTED ON THE ATTACHED SCHEDULE v EVCL Chill Limited (in administration) and 3 others — 2024
- Case reference
- 2603159/2021
- Decision date
- 15 November 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Victoria Butler
Parties
5 namedClaimant
1. UNITED ROAD TRANSPORT UNION 2. MR C BONSER & OTHERS 3. GRALEY & OTHERS 4. OWEN & OTHERS 5. MALPASS & OTHERS 6. INDIVIDUAL CLAIMANTS LISTED ON THE ATTACHED SCHEDULE
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a judgment by consent in claims brought by the United Road Transport Union and individual claimants against EVCL Chill Limited, EVCL One Limited, EVCL Two Limited and EVCL Three Limited, all in administration. The tribunal recorded that the respondents had previously traded as EVCL Cargo Logistics / NFT Distribution Limited, that joint administrators were appointed on 24 September 2021, and that the claimants listed in the schedule were employees of the respondents. It found that the claimants were dismissed by reason of redundancy on various dates between 27 September 2021 and 29 October 2021.
The tribunal found that the respondents did not fully inform and consult the claimants in accordance with s.188 and s.188A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. On the s.189 complaint, it made a protective award in favour of the employees listed in the attached schedule and ordered remuneration for a protected period of 90 days beginning on each claimant’s redundancy date. It also recorded that any sums not paid by the Redundancy Payments Service would rank as ordinary unsecured claims in the administration, that the Employment Protection (Recoupment of Jobseeker’s Allowance and Income Support) Regulations 1996 applied, and that each party would bear its own costs and fees.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Protective award claim under s.189 TULRCA 1992. The tribunal recorded that the respondents did not fully inform and consult in accordance with s.188 and s.188A. Judgment was by consent and the extracted text does not state a monetary figure. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- s.188 TULRCA 1992
- s.188A TULRCA 1992
- s.189 TULRCA 1992
- Employment Protection (Recoupment of Jobseeker’s Allowance and Income Support) Regulations 1996
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.