Not actually Dyson, one of their parts suppliers.

The significance of this ruling is that a British company can be held liable for its suppliers' treatment of workers in anther country.

To add, what I wrote in parent is very brief and superficial. There is at least one comment here with more detail about when they can be liable, and why Dyson was liable in this case.

But why only demonstrate power over 12 people and not the alleged 1200+ that work there?