Cases6008698/2025

Claimant v Market Dining Ltd t/a Carmel Fitrozvia

24 September 2025Before Employment Judge WebsterLondon Centralon papers

Outcome

Default judgment£6,842

Individual claims

Failure to Inform & Consultsucceeded

The respondent dismissed more than 30 individuals from the workplace on 19 January 2025 when it ceased trading without carrying out any consultation as required by TULRCA 1992. The claimant was entitled to a protective award of 90 days as sought, which the tribunal granted in the respondent's absence.

Facts

The claimant was employed by Market Dining Ltd trading as Carmel Fitrozvia. On 19 January 2025, the respondent ceased trading and made more than 30 individuals redundant from the workplace. The respondent failed to carry out any consultation with affected employees before the redundancies. The claimant filed a claim in the tribunal on 13 March 2025. The respondent, which was in voluntary liquidation, failed to present a response.

Decision

Employment Judge Webster determined the claim under rule 21 as the respondent had not presented a valid response. The tribunal found that the respondent had breached its duty to inform and consult under the collective redundancy provisions. The claimant was awarded £6,841.52 representing the maximum 90-day protective award sought.

Practical note

Employers who dismiss 20 or more employees within a 90-day period must comply with collective consultation obligations under TULRCA 1992, and failure to do so will result in a protective award of up to 90 days' pay per affected employee.

Award breakdown

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

TULRCA 1992

Case details

Case number
6008698/2025
Decision date
24 September 2025
Hearing type
default judgment
Hearing days
Classification
default

Respondent

Sector
hospitality
Represented
No

Claimant representation

Represented
No