Cases1305729/2024

Claimant v MatchesFashion Limited (In Administration)

24 September 2025Before Employment Judge T PerryMidlands Weston papers

Outcome

Claimant succeeds

Individual claims

Failure to Inform & Consultsucceeded

MatchesFashion Limited (in administration) failed to adequately comply with the requirement of section 188 of the Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 to inform and consult before collective redundancies. The Joint Administrators consented to the claims proceeding and the tribunal made protective awards by consent.

Facts

MatchesFashion Limited entered administration on 8 March 2024. Multiple employees (235 claimants) were dismissed as redundancies. The employer failed to adequately comply with section 188 TULRCA 1992 requirements to inform and consult with affected employees before collective redundancies. Claims were brought by two groups of claimants initially against both MatchesFashion Limited and MF Bidco Limited, though all claimants were employed only by MatchesFashion. The Joint Administrators consented to the claims proceeding.

Decision

The tribunal made protective awards by consent under section 189 TULRCA 1992. The claim against MF Bidco Limited was dismissed on withdrawal. 207 claimants received protective awards of 90 days' remuneration, while 28 claimants received 60 days' remuneration, all commencing from 8 March 2024. The tribunal made no order as to costs, with each party bearing their own expenses. Recoupment provisions apply.

Practical note

Employers entering administration who fail to comply with collective consultation obligations under TULRCA 1992 remain liable for protective awards which can be substantial in multi-claimant cases, even where administrators consent to claims proceeding.

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 s.188Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 s.189Employment Protection (Recoupment of Benefits) Regulations 1996

Case details

Case number
1305729/2024
Decision date
24 September 2025
Hearing type
default judgment
Hearing days
Classification
default

Respondent

Sector
retail
Represented
Yes
Rep type
in house

Claimant representation

Represented
Yes