Claimant v 1st Choice Windows NE Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
Struck out under Rule 38 for having no reasonable prospect of success, unreasonable conduct, non-compliance with tribunal orders, and failure to actively pursue. Claim brought two years outside time limits with no explanation.
Struck out under Rule 38 for having no reasonable prospect of success, unreasonable conduct, non-compliance with tribunal orders, and failure to actively pursue. Claim brought two years outside time limits with no explanation.
Unspecified notice pay claim struck out under Rule 38 for having no reasonable prospect of success, unreasonable conduct, non-compliance with tribunal orders, and failure to actively pursue. Claim brought two years outside time limits.
Facts
The claimant was a director of the respondent from June 2020 to December 2022. She brought claims for redundancy pay, notice pay and holiday pay in December 2024, two years after termination. The respondent is in voluntary liquidation and did not defend. The claimant failed to respond to two sets of tribunal orders requesting basic information, failed to attend a full merits hearing in March 2025, and failed to attend the rescheduled hearing in May 2025. On the day of the second hearing, she told the tribunal clerk she could not complete the paperwork due to mental health problems, which had never previously been mentioned.
Decision
The tribunal struck out all claims under Rule 38 on four grounds: no reasonable prospect of success (claims two years out of time with no explanation), unreasonable conduct, non-compliance with tribunal orders, and failure to actively pursue. The tribunal considered the overriding objective and concluded it was proportionate to strike out given the claimant's complete non-engagement with the process and the tribunal's lack of confidence she would engage even if the matter were re-listed.
Practical note
Persistent non-compliance with tribunal orders and failure to engage with proceedings, combined with claims significantly out of time, will result in strike-out even where the respondent is insolvent and has not defended.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6022509/2024
- Decision date
- 13 May 2025
- Hearing type
- strike out
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Sector
- construction
- Represented
- No
Employment details
- Role
- Director
- Service
- 3 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No