Case 3313789/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms J Melrose & Others v Buckingham Group Contracting Ltd (in administration) and 1 other — 2024
- Case reference
- 3313789/2023
- Decision date
- 26 June 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Foxwell Date
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Ms J Melrose & Others
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal found that the claimants were employed at the same establishment at Blackpit Farm, Stowe, Buckinghamshire, and were made redundant on or after 4 September 2023. There was no recognised trade union or elected employee representatives at the establishment, and 20 or more employees were made redundant or placed at risk of redundancy on or within 90 days of 4 September 2023.
The Tribunal found that the dismissals took place without any consultation having occurred. The first respondent, which was in administration, had not filed a response but its administrators consented to the claim proceeding; the second respondent filed a response to assist the Tribunal only and had no direct knowledge of events. The Tribunal considered it disproportionate to convene a hearing.
The claim for a protective award succeeded. The Tribunal made a protective award for the claimants who worked at the Blackpit Farm establishment and were dismissed as redundant on or after 4 September 2023, requiring remuneration for a protected period beginning on 4 September 2023 and lasting 90 days. The judgment states that the Recoupment Regulations apply.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Claim for a protective award for failure to comply with section 188 of the Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 in relation to collective redundancy consultation. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 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
- protective awards are punitive and should be for the maximum period unless there are circumstances making it just not to do so
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.