Mr J Hunter v Border Cars Group Ltd (in Administration) — 2020

Mr J Hunter brought a claim for a protective award after his employment with Border Cars Group Ltd (in Administration) ended on 11 July 2019. The tribunal recorded that the administrator's consent to bring proceedings had been obtained, that no ET3 had been lodged, and that there was no recognised union in the workplace. It found that there were more than 20 employees at the relevant work base, so it was unnecessary to determine whether the workplace was a separate establishment for the purposes of the 1992 Act.

The tribunal found there had been no discussion with the claimant about redundancies, termination, or the possibility of insolvency, and that he had not been consulted before being told on 11 July 2019 that his employment had ended. It held that the consultation obligations in section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 were not complied with because there was no recognised trade union, no election or appointment of employee representatives, and no individual consultation. It also found that, because the redundancy was for more than 20 but fewer than 100 employees, consultation should have begun at least 30 days before the first dismissal.

Applying the approach described in Newage Transmission Ltd v TGWU & others, Susie Radin Ltd v GMB & others, and Clarks of Hove Ltd v Bakers' Union, the tribunal started from the standard 90-day period for a protective award. It noted that no special circumstances were advanced to justify reducing that period, and that there had been no consultation whatsoever. It therefore declared that the respondents had failed to comply with section 188 and made a protective award for the claimant for the full 90-day protected period, running from 11 July 2019 to 9 October 2019.