Case 3313203/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs Sandra Roberts and Others v Transitions UK (in Administration); and 1 other — 2024
- Case reference
- 3313203/2022
- Decision date
- 4 April 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Ord Appearances
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mrs Sandra Roberts and Others
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal declared that the First Respondent failed to comply with its duties under s.188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 by failing to consult properly or at all with the Claimants about proposed redundancies.
The redundancies took effect on 22 September 2022. The Claimants were told on 9 September 2022 that they would all be made redundant and would not be paid for work done after that date, and the tribunal recorded that there was no prior consultation.
The tribunal found that 28 employees were made redundant without proper consultation and set the appropriate protective award period under s.189 at 56 days, running from 22 September 2022 to 17 November 2022. For Mrs Sandra Roberts in case number 3313203/2022, the weekly wage was £458.33 and the protective award was £3,666.64.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Protective award for failure to comply with collective redundancy consultation duties under s.188 Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. The award for case number 3313203/2022, Mrs Sandra Roberts, was £3,666.64. | Upheld | — | £3,667 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,667
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.188 Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- s.189 Trade Union and 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.