Cases2401336/2024

Claimant v The Asset Exchange Ltd (in administration)

13 March 2025Before Employment Judge Leachon papers

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Otherstruck out

Claim struck out because the respondent company is in administration and neither the consent of the Administrator nor the permission of the court was obtained as required by the Insolvency Act 1986. Additionally, the claimant failed to actively pursue the claim and did not provide an acceptable reason when given the opportunity.

Facts

Mr Holland brought a claim against The Asset Exchange Ltd, which was in administration. The claimant failed to obtain the necessary consent from the Administrator or permission from the court as required by the Insolvency Act 1986. On 11 February 2025, the Tribunal invited the claimant to explain why the claim should not be struck out for non-pursuit, but he failed to provide an acceptable reason.

Decision

The Tribunal struck out the claim on two grounds: first, the statutory requirement under the Insolvency Act 1986 for administrator consent or court permission had not been met; second, the claimant had failed to actively pursue the claim and provided no acceptable reason when given the opportunity to do so.

Practical note

Claims against companies in administration require either administrator consent or court permission to proceed, and failure to obtain this, combined with non-pursuit by an unrepresented claimant, will result in strike-out.

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

Insolvency Act 1986

Case details

Case number
2401336/2024
Decision date
13 March 2025
Hearing type
strike out
Hearing days
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Sector
other
Represented
No

Claimant representation

Represented
No