Claimant v Eleciserve E & M Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
Claim for remedy following rule 22 default judgment dismissed for non-pursuit. Claimant failed to attend remedy hearing without satisfactory explanation and had not provided schedule of loss. Financial claims capable of settlement had already been settled by Secretary of State.
Facts
The claimant had previously obtained a default judgment under rule 22 against the respondent company, which was in creditors voluntary liquidation. A remedy hearing was listed for 3 June 2025. The claimant did not attend, stating he was at work. The liquidator confirmed that financial claims capable of settlement by the Secretary of State had already been settled and there would be no dividend from the liquidation. The claimant had failed to provide a schedule of loss.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed the claim for remedy for non-pursuit. The judge found the claimant's explanation for non-attendance unsatisfactory, particularly as he had not notified the tribunal in advance and had not submitted a schedule of loss demonstrating he was actively pursuing his claims.
Practical note
Even after obtaining a default judgment, claimants must actively pursue remedy hearings and provide proper particulars of their claims, or risk dismissal for non-pursuit.
Case details
- Case number
- 3300533/2024
- Decision date
- 3 June 2025
- Hearing type
- remedy
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- construction
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No