Case 3310782/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs L Rayment & Others v Cedar Park Schools Ltd (In Administration), and 1 other — 2025
- Case reference
- 3310782/2024
- Decision date
- 11 December 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Foxwell Date
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mrs L Rayment & Others
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that the claimants worked at the first respondent's Wolverton establishment and were made redundant on 28 May 2024. It found that there was no recognised trade union or elected employee representatives at the establishment, and that 20 or more employees were made redundant or placed at risk of redundancy on or within 90 days of that date.
The tribunal found that the claimants were dismissed during that period without any consultation having taken place. It held that the first respondent had failed to comply with section 188 of the Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 and that the claim for a protective award succeeded.
The tribunal made a protective award for claimants dismissed as redundant on or after 28 May 2024, requiring the employer to pay remuneration for a protected period beginning on 28 May 2024 and lasting 90 days. It stated that there appeared to be no reason to depart from the principle that protective awards are punitive and should be for the maximum period unless circumstances make it just not to do so.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trade union | The tribunal found a failure to comply with section 188 of the Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 and stated that the claim for a protective award succeeds. The award is expressed as 90 days' remuneration for the protected period, not as a calculated monetary amount. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 188 of the Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- section 189(5)(b) of the Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
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.