Radin Ltd v GMB & Ors
The Employment Tribunal did not err in law by awarding the maximum protective period where there was a complete failure to consult, as the purpose of the award is to sanction the employer’s default, not to compensate for loss or consider the futility of consultation.
- Parties
- Appellant: Susie Radin Ltd.; Respondents: GMB and Others
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 20 February 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Protective Award, Collective Redundancies, Consultation Obligations, Remedies for Failure to Consult
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Susie Radin Ltd.
Appellant
GMB and Others
Respondents
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal
Legal Issues
- 1 What is the purpose of a protective award under s. 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992?
- 2 How should the length of the protected period be determined?
- 3 Is the futility of consultation relevant to the making or length of a protective award?
Ratio Decidendi
The Employment Tribunal did not err in law by awarding the maximum protective period where there was a complete failure to consult, as the purpose of the award is to sanction the employer’s default, not to compensate for loss or consider the futility of consultation.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appellant to pay the solicitors of the GMB £8,938.21 by way of costs, payable on or before 12th March 2004.
- Permission to appeal to the House of Lords refused.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment