Mr G Williams (Legal Officer) For the First v Ms K Harper (Liquidator) For the Second Respondent: None — 2023

The tribunal heard a protective-award claim under s.188 and s.189 TULRCA 1992 arising from redundancies made on 15 January 2021 at the first respondent's factory. The first respondent had already accepted at a preliminary hearing that it had dismissed 20 or more employees at one establishment within 90 days, that Community Union was a recognised union, that it had not consulted for the statutory minimum period, that no special circumstances were relied on, and that no reasonably practicable steps towards compliance had been taken.

The facts were not disputed. Mrs Beattie said there had been less work for at least 12 months before 15 January 2021 and that she had felt things were going wrong, but hoped work would pick up. Liquidators came into the factory on the day of dismissal and told employees at work that the first respondent had gone into insolvency. The tribunal found that there had been no consultation or discussion with the employees, the union, or any elected representative about the possibility of redundancies.

Applying the approach in Susie Radin Ltd v GMB and others [2004] EWCA Civ 180, the tribunal held that the protected period should start on 15 January 2021 and that a 90-day period was just and equitable because there had been no consultation and no mitigating circumstances justifying a reduction. Community Union's claim and Mr Paul Sargent's own claim were well founded; the other individual claims were dismissed because Community Union had standing to bring the claim on behalf of its members.