1/ Seahorse v Nautilus: Two important points arise from this Court of Appeal judgment about the reach of collective consultation rights under TULR(C)A s.188, one territorial and the other more generally definitional. Here's the judgment: bailii.org/cgi-bin/format…) #ukemplaw
2/ On the definitional point, the CA looked at the definition of 'establishment' (as s.188 operates when 20+ are to be made redundant within 90 days at 1 establishment). Put simply, the CA held that a unit (here each ship) with an assigned workforce is an establishment. 
3/ On the question of territorial scope, the CA considered whether the focus under s.188 is on the individual or the establishment. The CA found for the latter, with Underhill LJ identifying a host of practical problems if the individual was the focus.
4/ Here the territorial location of the ships was key. There being no strong countervailing evidential features in this case going the other way, those employed on ships outside GB waters fell outside of the territorial scope of the protection afforded by s.188.
