Cases1307001/2024

Claimant v Longton Taverns Limited (in creditors voluntary liquidation)

29 July 2025Before Employment Judge BennettBirmingham

Outcome

Claimant succeeds£5,284

Individual claims

Failure to Inform & Consultsucceeded

The tribunal found that both respondents failed to comply with their obligation to inform and consult under Regulation 13 of the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 in relation to a TUPE transfer. A protective award of 10 weeks' pay was made.

Unfair Dismissalsucceeded

The tribunal found the complaint of unfair dismissal was well-founded. The claimant was unfairly dismissed by the second respondent. Awards were made for both basic award and compensatory award, reflecting the tribunal's finding that the dismissal was procedurally and/or substantively unfair.

Facts

The claimant was an employee of Longton Taverns Limited, which entered creditors voluntary liquidation. A TUPE transfer occurred involving the second respondent, Ms Cheryl Chadwick. Neither respondent complied with their legal obligation to inform and consult the claimant about the transfer. The claimant was subsequently dismissed by the second respondent. Neither respondent appeared at the hearing to defend the claims.

Decision

The tribunal found in favour of the claimant on both claims. Both respondents were jointly and severally liable for a protective award of £2,810 for failure to inform and consult under TUPE. The second respondent was ordered to pay £2,474 for unfair dismissal, comprising a basic award and compensatory award. Total award: £5,284.

Practical note

Employers must comply with TUPE consultation obligations regardless of insolvency proceedings, and both transferor and transferee can be held jointly and severally liable for failures to inform and consult.

Award breakdown

Basic award£562
Compensatory award£1,912

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

TUPE Regulations 2006 Regulation 13

Case details

Case number
1307001/2024
Decision date
29 July 2025
Hearing type
full merits
Hearing days
1
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
hospitality
Represented
No

Employment details

Claimant representation

Represented
Yes
Rep type
lay rep