Claimant v MMR (Kirkcaldy) Ltd
Outcome
Individual claims
The claim was struck out under rule 38(1)(d) for non-pursuit. The claimant failed to respond to multiple requests from the Tribunal for information and did not respond when asked if they wished to withdraw following contact from an insolvency agency. After being given a final opportunity to provide reasons why the claim should not be struck out by 30 June 2025, the claimant failed to respond or request a hearing.
Facts
Miss Sargenti brought a claim against MMR (Kirkcaldy) Ltd, a company in voluntary liquidation. The Tribunal requested further information to issue a default judgment on 1 April 2025. The claimant responded on 4 May 2025 stating an insolvency agency had contacted her about claiming money back. Despite multiple reminders and a final warning on 16 June 2025, the claimant failed to respond or clarify whether she wished to proceed with the claim.
Decision
The Tribunal struck out the claim under rule 38(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 on the grounds that the claim had not been actively pursued. The claimant failed to respond to multiple requests for information and did not provide acceptable reasons why the claim should not be struck out or request a hearing by the deadline of 30 June 2025.
Practical note
Claimants must actively respond to tribunal correspondence and pursue their claims, even where the respondent is insolvent, or face strike out for non-pursuit under rule 38.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 8000053/2025
- Decision date
- 3 July 2025
- Hearing type
- strike out
- Hearing days
- —
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Sector
- other
- Represented
- No
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No