Case 3312586/2022 · Employment Tribunal

Ms N Allison v Travel And Financial Services Ltd and 1 other — 2023

Case reference: 3312586/2022
Decision date: 27 July 2023
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Ainscough Date

Indexed: 18 May 2026

Parties

3 named

Claimant

Ms N Allison

Respondents

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The judgment was issued under rule 21 because neither respondent had presented a response before the rule 21 judgment, and the Official Receiver confirmed that the first respondent would not contest the protective award claim. The tribunal considered the file and found it could determine the protective award claim without a hearing.

The tribunal found that it was not reasonably practicable for the claimant to bring the claim within three months of termination, but that she issued it within a reasonable period thereafter. The claimant had been employed as a Regional Manager, the first respondent employed over 20 employees in the Regional Manager group, and the claimant was not a member of a recognised trade union or bargaining unit.

The first respondent entered compulsory liquidation on 23 September 2019, the Official Receiver was appointed, and the claimant was notified of immediate termination. The tribunal found there had been no proper warning, notice, or consultation with recognised trade unions or the claimant, and no elected or appointed employee representatives for consultation under section 188A. It held that the first respondent breached section 188 of the 1992 Act and made a protective award for the maximum protected period of 90 days from 23 September 2019.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Trade union	The claim was for a protective award under sections 188 and 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 for failure to comply with collective consultation requirements. The tribunal ordered payment equivalent to 90 days' remuneration, but no monetary amount was stated.	Upheld	—	—

Legal tests applied

5 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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.