protective award
-
Carillion Services Ltd v Benson & Ors EA-2021-000269-BA
Appeal against a decision that the Respondent had failed to comply with the requirements of section 188 TULRCA to consult with representatives about proposals to dismiss as redundant 20 or more employees at an establishment within a period of 90 days or less. Appeal dismissed.
- cases
19/10/2021 07:41
-
Seahorse Maritime Ltd v Nautilus International [2018] EWCA Civ 2789
Appeal against an ET ruling, upheld by the EAT, that the ET had the jurisdiction to entertain the employees' claim for a protective award. Appeal allowed.
- cases
23/01/2019 10:42
-
Vining v London Borough of Wandsworth [2017] EWCA Civ 1092
Appeal against two EAT decisions that 1) ruled that members of local authority parks police forces could not bring claims of unfair dismissal and 2) their trade union could not bring claims for a protective award. The first decision was upheld but the trade union decision was remitted to the ET.
- cases
31/07/2017 10:31
-
E Ivor Hughes Educational Foundation v Morris & Ors UKEAT/0023/15/LA
Appeal against the length of protective award (90 days) awarded to the claimants after the employer had failed to consult about redundancies. A second appeal against a finding that 3 of the claimants had also been unfairly dismissed. First appeal dismissed, second appeal allowed.
- cases
22/06/2015 14:03
-
USDAW & Wilson v Woolworths & Ors (Case C-182/13)
Preliminary opinion on whether the phrase in the EU Collective Redundancies Directive 98/59 ‘at least 20’ dismissals referred to dismissals over the employer’s establishments, or the number in each establishment.
- cases
06/02/2015 10:02
-
Capital Energy Solutions v Arnold UKEAT/0138/14/JOJ
Appeal against a ruling that the expiry of the employees fixed term contracts, of which there were more than 20, triggered s188 of TULR(C)A and the award of a protective award because the employer had failed to consult. Appeal allowed and remitted to the EJ for further consideration.
- cases
18/09/2014 10:15
-
Jackson Lloyds Ltd and Mears Group PLC v Smith & Ors UKEAT/0127/13/LA
Appeal against a ruling that the claimants had transferred under TUPE after the transferee purchased all the shares of the transferor. Appeal dismissed.
- cases
04/04/2014 19:39
-
London Borough of Barnet v Unison and NSL Ltd UKEAT/0191/13/RN
Appeal against 1) the level of protective award made to the successful claimants and 2) a failure by the ET to make a declaration that the second respondent was jointly and severally liable for a breach of the TUPE regulations. Cross-appeal by the second respondent that there should have been apportionment between it and the first respondent in respect of the TUPE award. Appeal allowed and cross-appeal dismissed.
- cases
08/03/2014 21:20
-
USDAW & Anor v Ethel Austin Ltd & Ors [2014] EWCA Civ 142
Judgment explaining reasons for referring this case to the CJEU. The proceedings involve collective redundancy consultation where the insolvent employers had multiple sites, some with more and some with fewer than 20 employees, the limit required by s188 of TULRCA 1992 to qualify for a protective award. Employees at the smaller sites had been unsuccessful in their claims for such an award.
- cases
23/02/2014 17:54
-
USDAW v Ethel Austin Ltd (In Administration) UKEAT/0547/12/KN; USDAW & Anor v Unite The Union & Ors UKEAT/0548/12/KN
Appeal against a ruling that the claimants who had been dismissed for redundancy when the employers became insolvent were not entitled to a protective award because they worked in shops which employed fewer than 20 workers. Appeal allowed.
- cases
03/07/2013 13:52
