Mr E Harper and 25 others v BJS Yorkshire Ltd (in Creditors Voluntary Liquidation) and Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (England and Wales : Protective Award) [2019] UKET 2600715/2019 (20 August 2019)

The Tribunal found that BJS Yorkshire Ltd failed to comply with its statutory duty to consult, and therefore the claimants are entitled to a protective award.

Source-derived case information.

Citation: [2019] UKET 2600715/2019
Parties: Claimant: Mr E Harper and 25 others; Respondent: BJS Yorkshire Ltd (in Creditors Voluntary Liquidation); Respondent: Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy
Jurisdiction: United Kingdom
Judgment Date: 20 August 2019
Procedural Posture: Employment Tribunal / Judgment on Protective Award
Outcome: Protective award granted
Legal Topics: Protective Award, Collective Redundancy, Insolvency

Employment Law Protective Award Collective Redundancy Insolvency

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

Mr E Harper and 25 others

Claimant

BJS Yorkshire Ltd (in Creditors Voluntary Liquidation)

Respondent

Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Tribunal / Judgment on Protective Award

Legal Issues

1 Whether the claimants are entitled to a protective award due to failure to consult under section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that BJS Yorkshire Ltd failed to comply with its statutory duty to consult, and therefore the claimants are entitled to a protective award.

Court Disposition

Protective award granted

Orders

The claimants are awarded a protective award for the maximum period permitted by law, to be paid by the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy.

About this LexChat collection

Publisher and coverage

LexChat is published by Esheria. Coverage reflects the case law currently mapped from identified source collections; it may be incomplete, delayed, or later corrected. The official source controls where it differs from this research page.

AI and research method

Source-derived facts are shown separately from AI-generated material. If an AI summary is available, it is explicitly labelled and remains a non-authoritative research aid.

Corrections and reporting

Report a source mismatch, factual issue, personal-data concern, or licensing question to support@esheria.co.ke. Include this page's URL and the supporting official source so the record can be reviewed, corrected, restricted, or withdrawn.

Legal-information disclaimer

LexChat provides legal information and research tools, not legal advice. Verify currency, status, citations, and jurisdiction with authoritative sources and a qualified professional where appropriate.