Case 3306054/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs Adile Ismailova Muslieva v First Respondent: Patrick James Long, William Stephen Long & the personal — 2025
- Case reference
- 3306054/2024
- Decision date
- 8 July 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Skehan Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs Adile Ismailova Muslieva
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that 20 or more employees at the Lutton Farm establishment were placed at risk of redundancy on or within 90 days of 11 April 2024, that there was no recognised trade union or elected employee representatives, and that the dismissals on 3 May 2024 did not comply with the consultation requirements in section 188 TULRCA. The claimant's individual claim for a protective award under section 189 TULRCA therefore succeeded.
The tribunal made a protective award for the claimant's employment at the establishment, with the protected period beginning on 11 April 2024 and lasting 90 days. It noted that protective awards are punitive and that there was no reason to depart from the maximum period. The Recoupment Regulations apply.
The tribunal also found that the claimant had not been paid wages from 8 April 2024 and that the claims for unauthorised deduction from wages and holiday pay were well founded. It ordered the First to Fifth Respondents, jointly and severally, to pay £2,022.02 for arrears of pay and £323.38 for unpaid accrued but untaken holiday pay. The tribunal further recorded that the claimant had been dismissed by reason of redundancy but had less than two years' service and was not entitled to a statutory redundancy payment, and that there was no claim for notice pay.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Protective award under sections 188 and 189 TULRCA. The tribunal found the respondents failed to comply with the collective consultation requirements and made a 90-day protected period starting on 11 April 2024; recoupment regulations apply. | Upheld | — | — |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy but had less than two years' service and was not entitled to a statutory redundancy payment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Arrears of pay for the period 8 April 2024 to 3 May 2024. The First to Fifth Respondents were ordered to pay the sum on a joint and several basis. | Upheld | — | £2,022 |
| Holiday pay | Unpaid accrued but untaken holiday pay. The First to Fifth Respondents were ordered to pay the sum on a joint and several basis. | Upheld | — | £323 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,345
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
3 references- section 188 TULRCA
- section 189 TULRCA
- section 189(5)(b) TULRCA
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.