Ms J Graham and Others v MatchesFashion Ltd (In Administraion) and Others: 1305729/2024 and Others
JUDGMENT
BY CONSENT UPON reading the joint application submitted by or on behalf of;[1]The claimants named in the Schedule 1 (“the Claimants”); The First Respondent; and[3]The Second Respondent AND UPON(a) The claimants’ representative having confirmed the list of claimants in schedule 1 is a composite of the lists of claimants named in schedules 2 and 3(b) the third respondent having reviewed the draft of this judgment and has no objections or comments upon it(c) the parties having agreed to the terms of the Judgment set out below by consent, the Judgment of the Employment Tribunal made under Rule 62 of The Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 is that: Correct Respondent[1]The claims were presented against MatchesFashion Limited (in administration) and MF Bidco Limited (in administration).[2]All of the Claimants were employed by MatchesFashion Limited (in administration).[3]The claim against MF Bidco Limited (in administration) is dismissed on withdrawal. The protective award claims under section 189 of the Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992[4]On 8 March 2024, the First Respondent and Second Respondent entered into administration, the joint administrators being Julian Heathcote and Benjamin Dymant of Teneo Financial Advisory Limited (the “Joint Administrators”).[5]The Joint Administrators hereby consent for the claims set out in Schedule 2 and Schedule 3 of this Judgment to proceed.[6]In relation to the claims that are set out in the Schedule 2 to this Judgment only;6.1 MatchesFashion Limited (in administration) failed to adequately comply with a requirement of section 188 of the Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 and the claim for a protective award brought under section 189 of the Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 succeeds.6.2 MatchesFashion Limited (in administration) is ordered to pay remuneration (i.e., a protective award) to the Claimants named in Schedule 2 only for a protected period of 90 days beginning on 8 March 2024 being the date on which the first of the dismissals to which the complaint relates took effect.[7]In relation to the claims that are set out in the Schedule 3 to this Judgment only;7.1 MatchesFashion Limited (in administration) failed to adequately comply with a requirement of section 188 of the Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 and the claim for a protective award brought under section 189 of the Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 succeeds.7.2 MatchesFashion Limited (in administration) is ordered to pay remuneration (i.e., a protective award) to the Claimants named in Schedule 3 only for a protected period of 60 days beginning on 8 March 2024 being the date on which the first of the dismissals to which the complaint relates took effect. Costs[8]There is no order requiring any of the parties to pay or reimburse any other party’s costs or fees and each party shall bear their own costs and fees in relation to these proceedings.