Sleep Factory Ltd (In Creditor’s Voluntary Liquidation)

Case Summary

21 claimants brought claims for protective awards following their redundancy dismissal on 12 September 2025. The respondent failed to present a response and the tribunal found the respondent had completely failed to comply with statutory collective consultation requirements under the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. A protective award was made for the maximum 90-day period.

The tribunal found that the respondent completely failed to comply with statutory requirements to consult collectively with employees before dismissing more than 20 employees as redundant within 90 days. In the absence of a recognised trade union, the respondent was required to inform and consult employee representatives, which it failed to do.

Use these claim-type pages to compare this decision with other published tribunal cases, outcome patterns, and visible award data.

• •Failure to comply with section 188 and 188A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
• •Collective consultation requirements for redundancy dismissals
• •Election of employee representatives
• •Protective award for failure to consult

(See attached schedule) EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Mr M Bismilla & 20 others Respondent: Sleep Factory Ltd (In Creditor’s Voluntary Liquidation) Heard at: Leeds (By Video) On: 13 th May 2026 Before: Employment Judge S Edwards Representation Claimants: Mr Jamil Zaidi – In person Mr Naeem Khan – In Person No attendance on behalf of Mr M Bismilla & 18 others Respondent: Did not attend Secretary of State for Business and Trade: Representations provided on form ET3 (not a party) The respondent having failed to present a response to the claim, pursuant to Rule 22 Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 the Tribunal issues the following: JUDGMENT 1. The claimants are entitled to bring these claims because the complaint concerns a failure by the respondent relating to the election of employee representatives, and the claimants were employees dismissed as redundant. There was no recognised trade union for the purposes of collective bargaining. 2. The respondent failed to comply with the requirements of section 188 and 188A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. 3. The respondent dismissed as redundant more than 20 employees at one establishment within a period of 90 days or less. 4. It is declared that the claim for a protective award is well-founded. 5. A protective award is made in respect of the claimant and 20 others as set out in the attached schedule. 6. The claimants were employed at Enterprise Works, St Oswalds Place, Ossett, West Yorkshire, WF5 9JT and were all dismissed on 12 th September 2025. 7. The protected period begins on 12 th September 2025 and is for a period of 90 days, it being just and equitable to make the maximum award because of the complete failure to comply with the statutory requirements for …