Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2004] All ER (D) 203 (Oct)
Court: Court of Appeal, Civil Division
Judge:

Waller, Tuckey LJJ and Sir Christopher Mantell

Representation John Hendy QC and Damian Brown (instructed by Thompsons) for the union.
  John Hand QC and Oliver Segal (instructed by EWS legal department) for the respondent.
Judgment Dates: 15 October 2004

Catchwords

Trade union - Industrial action - Notice of ballot - Requirements of notice - (Consolidation) Act 1992, s 226A.

The Case

Notice to a single representative was considered sufficient notice to two separate corporate entities for the purposes of s226A of the in the particular circumstances of the case, since the companies had the one representative in industrial negotiations and the schedule attached to the notice gave particulars of employees from both companies.

If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.