More than 30 people had their employment terminated on the day that Grantown-based McLeod Building went into voluntary liquidation in May 2015, owing almost £1 million.

The Press & Journal has now reported that a tribunal in Inverness heard that staff did not receive any prior warning of redundancy or chance of consultation, contravening the legal 90 days required notice.

The claim is for a protective award because no 90-day consultation took place with employees.

Representatives from liquidators Gerber Landa and Gee argued that the company experienced an economic downturn at the start of 2015 and, despite making provisional arrangements with HM Revenue and Customs, were unable to meet the payment in May and ceased trading.

McLeod Building owed £966,847 when it went out of business. This included £594,109 to other firms in the trade and £207,718 to HM Revenue and Customs in unpaid PAYE and VAT bills.

Liquidator Tom Hughes said: “This was a longstanding, high-profile employer in the area so it would have been difficult to enter into the consultation process. The directors, although aware of the financial pressure, were trying to continue with the business and make the cash to keep going, and really a very short warning of the collapse was inevitable. They were reactive rather than proactive. We had to liquidate the company immediately.”

Tribunal judge James Hendry said: “A protective award will be made but the issue is how much.

“These regulations are there to protect workers against the sort of situation that ended up here.

“Consultation is particularly important because people who don’t get consultation might go and buy new car, or buy a house or expensive holiday and have not been given notice that their job is at risk.

“The directors knew their business was at risk for some time but hoped to keep the show on the road.

“What I need to do is assess whether or not it is sufficient in law to mitigate the circumstances here.

“I will consider whether, or I will decide how much of the 90-day period should be reduced.”

After the tribunal Mr Hughes said there would “definitely be a payment”, adding: “We are talking about a substantial claim and there is no set offs. I know it will be in the tens of thousands.”