GMB v AMICUS (AEEU & MSF) & Ors [2003] UKEAT 1094_02_1404 (14 April 2003)

GMB v AMICUS (AEEU & MSF) & Ors [2003] UKEAT 1094_02_1404 (14 April 2003)

The Employment Tribunal erred in law by holding that the decision leading to the proposed dismissals was not that of the American parent company and by limiting the definition of 'information' in Section 188(7) to that set out in Section 188(4); the case must be remitted for further findings of fact regarding the timing and contemplation of the parent companies' decisions and their causal effect on redundancies.

Citation
[2003] UKEAT 1094_02_1404
Parties
Appellant: GMB & AMICUS (AEEU & MSF); Respondent: Beloit Walmsley Ltd (In Administration)
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
14 April 2003
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal Tribunal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; case remitted to Employment Tribunal for further findings of fact.
Legal Topics
Collective Redundancy, Consultation Obligations, Special Circumstances Defence, Interpretation of EU Directives, Protective Awards
Employment Law Labour Law European Union Law Collective Redundancy Consultation Obligations Special Circumstances Defence Interpretation of EU Directives Protective Awards

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

GMB & AMICUS (AEEU & MSF)

Appellant

Beloit Walmsley Ltd (In Administration)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal Tribunal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Proper construction of the exception to consultation obligations under Section 188(7) of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
  2. 2 Whether decisions by parent companies constitute 'decisions leading to proposed dismissals' under Section 188(7)
  3. 3 Scope of 'information' required for consultation under Section 188(7)

Ratio Decidendi

The Employment Tribunal erred in law by holding that the decision leading to the proposed dismissals was not that of the American parent company and by limiting the definition of 'information' in Section 188(7) to that set out in Section 188(4); the case must be remitted for further findings of fact regarding the timing and contemplation of the parent companies' decisions and their causal effect on redundancies.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; case remitted to Employment Tribunal for further findings of fact.

Orders

  • Remit to Employment Tribunal to determine when the parent company decisions were made and whether those decisions contemplated redundancies, disregarding any period of delay in communication for the purposes of the special circumstances defence under Section 188(7).