Mr R Box and others v MSOLD1 Ltd (in Compulsory Liquidation) and others: 2301496/2023
[1]The claims against the second, third and fourth respondents are dismissed.[2]Judgment is given for each of the claimants against the first respondent.[3]Each claimant is entitled to a protective award for the maximum period of 90 days.[4]A full list of the claimants is annexed to this Judgment.[5]These proceedings are stayed for the period of three months pending an application to the Redundancy Payments Service in respect of the protective awards. Employment Judge Fowell Date 30 October 2023 3 of 3 Annex A LIST OF CLAIMANTS Adrian Downer Alys Faultless Priya George Finlay Goodman Laura Hodgson Charlotte Kinder Charlotte Lacey Darren Lighton Nikki Longhurst Mares Marinas Egidijus Norvaisas Sharon Perry Matthew Powell Kimberley Quince Mantas Raulickis James Reynolds Laura Ritchie Gary Sinclair Louis Smith[23]Shannon Williams Case Number: 2301496/2023 1 of 3 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant Mr Ryan Box & 22 others Respondents:(1) MSold1 Limited (in compulsory liquidation)(2) Inc & Co Limited(3) OLDMSO1351161009032023 LTD (in compulsory liquidation)(4) The Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Heard at Croydon (by video) On 30 October 2023 Before Employment Judge Fowell Representation Claimant Mohammed Balal of Aticus Law Solcitors Respondents No appearance (CORRECTED) JUDGMENT On it appearing to the Tribunal that:a. The claim concerns an alleged breach of the duty of collective consultation under section 188 Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 (the Act).b. The asset purchase agreement purportedly transferring the employment of the claimants from the first respondent to the third respondent (the Transfer) was declared void by court order on 18 November 2022, and accordingly the claimants remained employees of the first respondent.c. The second respondent company was established to effect the Transfer by stages but there is no record of its existence at Companies House. Case Number: 2301496/2023 2 of 3d. The fourth respondent was not at any time the employer of the claimants and so cannot be liable for the payment of a protective award.e. The first respondent has not submitted any response to the claim. IT IS DECLARED THAT the complaints by each claimant against the first respondent for failure to comply with the requirements of section 188 of the Act with regard to the election of employee respresentatives are well-founded. IT IS ORDERED THAT:[1]The claims against the second, third and fourth respondents are dismissed.[2]Judgment is given for each of the claimants against the first respondent.[3]Each claimant is entitled to a protective award for the maximum period of 90 days, with the protective period commencing on 18 November 2022.[4]A full list of the claimants is annexed to this Judgment.[5]These proceedings are stayed for the period of three months pending an application to the Redundancy Payments Service in respect of the protective awards. Employment Judge Fowell Date 30 October 2023 (Corrected 05 February 2024) Case Number: 2301496/2023 3 of 3 Annex A LIST OF CLAIMANTS Adrian Downer Alys Faultless Priya George Finlay Goodman Laura Hodgson Charlotte Kinder Charlotte Lacey Darren Lighton Nikki Longhurst Mares Marinas Egidijus Norvaisas Sharon Perry Matthew Powell Kimberley Quince Mantas Raulickis James Reynolds Laura Ritchie Gary Sinclair Louis Smith Shannon Williams