Case 6006640/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Fabris First v Carlton Forest 3PL Limited (in administration) Second Respondent: The Secretary of State for Business and Trade (SoS) Heard at Leeds by CVP — 2025
- Case reference
- 6006640/2024
- Decision date
- 29 July 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shulman REPRESENTATION
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Fabris First
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant was employed by the first respondent as group property director from 15 May 2023 until 28 March 2024, when he was dismissed by reason of redundancy. More than 20 employees were made redundant at a single establishment (Bawtry Park, Bawtry), and the claimant had not been consulted about his impending redundancy at the time of dismissal. The administrators consented to the claimant continuing his claims against the first respondent, which is in administration, and the Tribunal was satisfied that the Secretary of State was an interested party.
The Tribunal found the protective award complaint well founded and made a declaration to that effect, with a protected period of 90 days from 28 March 2024 to 26 June 2024 covering the claimant. For the purposes of the Judgment the award was not quantified, although the Reasons record that, without prejudice to the SoS's position, it would be eight weeks at £643.00 per week (a total of £5,144.00), with the claimant's gross salary at dismissal recorded as £6,667 per month.
On the breach of contract claim, the Tribunal found that the first respondent failed to pay £293.52 of pension contributions due under the claimant's auto-enrolled pension scheme and ordered the first respondent to pay that sum, or for it to be paid on completion of the Redundancy Payment Service process, whichever is the earlier.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Protective award claim under TULRCA for failure to consult on collective redundancy. The Tribunal made a declaration that the complaint was well founded and ordered a protective award covering the claimant for the protected period 28 March 2024 to 26 June 2024 (90 days). The judgment states the award shall not be quantified for the purposes of the Judgment but the Reasons note it would be eight weeks at £643.00 per week totalling £5,144.00, without prejudice to the SoS's position. No specific §4.4 enum exists for protective award; classified as 'other'. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Breach of contract under Article 3 of the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994 for failure to pay £293.52 of pension contributions to the claimant's auto-enrolled pension scheme. Award rounded to nearest integer GBP. | Upheld | — | £294 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £294
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Article 3 of the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994
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.