Case 3304198/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Plekhanov v Silverbird Global Limited (in administration) — 2026
- Case reference
- 3304198/2024
- Decision date
- 15 June 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Foxwell Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Plekhanov
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal upheld Mr A Plekhanov's claim for a protective award, finding that Silverbird Global Limited had failed to comply with section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. Mr Plekhanov worked at the respondent's establishment at Level 39, One Canada Square, Canary Wharf, and was made redundant on 21 March 2024. At least 20 employees at the establishment were made redundant or placed at risk of redundancy on or within 90 days of 13 March 2024. There was no recognised trade union or elected employee representatives, and Mr Plekhanov was dismissed without any consultation taking place.
The Tribunal found that the claim was brought within the time limit in section 189(5)(b) because the last dismissals occurred on or after 13 March 2024. The respondent, which was in administration, had not filed a response, but its administrators consented to the protective award claim proceeding. Applying the principle that protective awards are punitive and should cover the maximum period unless circumstances make a shorter period just, the Tribunal ordered 90 days' remuneration for a protected period beginning on 13 March 2024. No fixed monetary total was stated, and the Recoupment Regulations apply.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Protective award under section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. The award was 90 days' remuneration, but no fixed monetary sum was stated. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- s.188 Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- s.189(5)(b) Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 time limit
- Protective awards are punitive and should be for the maximum period unless circumstances make it just to depart
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.