Cases1406259/2023

Claimant v Kimbardel (Eversfield) Ltd

3 March 2025Before Employment Judge J Baxon papers

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Otherstruck out

Claim struck out on two grounds: (1) respondent company is in administration and neither the Administrator's consent nor court permission was obtained to continue proceedings as required by Insolvency Act 1986; (2) claimant failed to actively pursue the claim and failed to give acceptable reasons when given opportunity on 04 February 2025.

Facts

J Webster brought an employment tribunal claim against Kimbardel (Eversfield) Ltd (case number 1406259/2023). The respondent company entered administration. On 04 February 2025, the Tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to provide written reasons why the claim should not be struck out for failure to actively pursue it.

Decision

Employment Judge Bax struck out the claim on two grounds: first, the respondent company is in administration and the claimant had not obtained either the Administrator's consent or court permission to continue proceedings as required by the Insolvency Act 1986; second, the claimant failed to actively pursue the claim and did not provide acceptable reasons when given the opportunity to do so.

Practical note

When a respondent company enters administration, claimants must obtain either the Administrator's consent or court permission to continue tribunal proceedings, and failure to actively pursue a claim can result in strike-out even in insolvency situations.

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

Insolvency Act 1986

Case details

Case number
1406259/2023
Decision date
3 March 2025
Hearing type
strike out
Hearing days
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Sector
other
Represented
No

Claimant representation

Represented
No