In Darnton v Bournemouth University, the EAT has imposed a £10,000 penalty on the University for its failure to comply with the Information and Consultation of Employees Regulations 2004. The University had failed to arrange for the timely election of appropriate representatives in accordance with Regulation 19, largely because it formed a genuine but mistaken view about what time it had left available for compliance. While this did not excuse the employer from non-compliance with the Regulations, it could be taken into account as a mitigating factor. When setting the level of the penalty, the EAT considered it relevant that the employer had not shown a deliberate disregard for the Regulations. It also assisted the employer that it had formed a 'shadow' forum for information and consultation, which, while not technically compliant with the Regulations, enabled effective consultation to take place pending the operation of fully compliant procedures. Given these mitigating factors, it was appropriate for the penalty to be towards the bottom end of the scale (the maximum penalty being £75,000).