Employer Fails Redundancy Notice Requirements: Protective Award Granted
📌 In brief
In this case, an Employment Tribunal found that the employer did not follow proper procedures when making redundancies. As a result, affected workers received compensation under protective awards rules.
⚖️ Legal holding
An employer must provide proper notice of redundancy under the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 or face legal consequences including protective awards.
📖 What the law says
An employer must consult with appropriate representatives if they plan to dismiss 20 or more employees at one location within 90 days. Consultations must start at least 30 days before the first dismissal if fewer than 100 employees are involved, or at least 45 days if 100 or more are involved.
The employer must arrange a fair election for employee representatives who will consult on redundancies. The election must be conducted fairly, ensuring that voting is done in secret and that votes are accurately counted.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The employer failed to comply with statutory redundancy notice requirements, leading to a protective award for affected employees.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Employment Tribunal ruled that the employer failed to comply with sections 188 and 188A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, leading to a protective award for employees dismissed for redundancy.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
Case No: 1801049/2025 and others (See attached schedule)
10.2 Judgment - rule 61
March 2017
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS
Claimant: [redacted]
Respondents: [redacted]
(2) Secretary of State for Business & Trade
JUDGMENT
1. The respondent failed to comply with the requirements of sections 188 and 188A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992.
2. A protective award is made in respect of all claimants whose names are set out in the attached schedule dismissed for redundancy from 31 January 2024 that the respondent shall pay remuneration to them for the protected period of 90 days from 31 January 2024.
3. The Recoupment Regulations apply to this award.
Employment Judge Maidment
Date 14 May 2026
Case No: 1801049/2025 and others (See attached schedule)
10.2 Judgment - rule 61
March 2017
Schedule of Claims
Case Number Claimant Name 1801049/2025 [NAME] [APPELLANT] 1801051/2025 Miss [APPELLANT] [NAME] 1801053/2025 Mr [NAME] 1801057/2025 Mr [NAME] 1801063/2025 Mr [NAME] 1801092/2025 Mr [NAME] 1802460/2024 Mr [NAME] 1801149/2024 Mr [NAME] 1801176/2024 Mr [NAME]
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- Employment Tribunal Employer Failed to Consult Properly Before Redundancies: Claimants Win Prot…
- Employment Tribunal Employer Fails Redundancy Consultation, Faces Protective Award
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Rules Employer Must Comply with Protected Awards Requir…
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Orders Protective Award for Dismissed Workers
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Awards Protective Payments for Non-Compliant Dismissals
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Awards Protective Award for Collective Consultation Bre…
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Upholds Workers' Claims Against Employer
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Rules on Redundancy Consultation
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Awards Protective Period for Redundancy Consultation Fa…
- Employment Tribunal Employment Judge Ruling: Employer Must Compensate for Unauthorised Wages an…
- Employment Tribunal Claimant awarded outstanding redundancy payment and notice pay damages
A snapshot of this collection — not a prediction of your case's outcome.
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- Employer failed to provide proper notice of redundancy.
- Employer did not comply with collective consultation requirements for redundancies affecting 20 or more employees within 90 days.
- Employer breached statutory requirements concerning trade union rights and contractual obligations.
- Employer did not consult adequately before making redundancies, failing which the claimant is entitled to a protective award.
- Employer must make reasonable adjustments for disabled employees if it adversely affects them due to their disability.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The decision ruled in favour of employees who were dismissed for redundancy without proper notice from their employer.
Who was involved?
Employees and the employer, with the Secretary of State for Business & Trade also named as a respondent.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court found that the employer failed to comply with statutory requirements regarding redundancy notices, leading to a protective award for affected employees.
Which laws or rules were applied?
Sections 188 and 188A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 were key provisions in this case.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The employer's failure to provide proper notice for redundancy led to a protective award being granted to affected employees.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was in favour of the claimants, as they received a protective award.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
If an employer fails to provide proper notice before making redundancies, employees may be entitled to a protective award.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The judgment did not specify particular evidence but relied on the statutory requirements and the circumstances of the redundancy dismissals.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, decisions from Employment Tribunals can typically be appealed to an Employment Appeal Tribunal.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is advisable to seek legal advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving employment law and protective awards.