Case 3321582/2019 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Bathstore.com Ltd/Bathstore Ltd (In Administration) — 2019
- Case reference
- 3321582/2019
- Decision date
- 27 June 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Alliott Appearances
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr A Green, was dismissed by reason of redundancy on 27 June 2019. The respondent was in administration and did not attend the hearing; the joint administrators said they were content for the proceedings to go ahead but would not defend them. The tribunal proceeded on the papers and oral evidence before Employment Judge Alliott at Watford by telephone on 20 March 2020.
The tribunal found that there was no recognised trade union and no elected employee representatives, and that more than 20 employees were dismissed as redundant from the respondent's establishment at Home House, 3 Albany Place, Hyde Way, Welwyn Garden City. It held that there had been a complete failure to comply with the section 188 TULR(C)A 1992 duty to consult representatives, and that the claimant had standing to bring the claim.
The claim was therefore well founded. The tribunal held that the employer's default was very serious and that it was just and equitable to fix the protective period at 90 days. Using the claimant's annual salary of £50,000, the tribunal calculated the protective award at £12,329.10 (£50,000 divided by 365 multiplied by 90).
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The tribunal found a breach of section 188 Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 in failing to consult about redundancy dismissal and made a protective award of £12,329.10. It treated the respondent's default as very serious and set the protective period at 90 days. | Upheld | — | £12,329 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £12,329
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.188 TULR(C)A 1992
- just and equitable
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.