Cases8000399/2024

Claimant v First Endeavour LLP

23 January 2025Before Employment Judge A KempScotlandon papers

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Otherstruck out

Claim struck out for non-pursuit under rule 38(1)(d). Claimant failed to obtain court permission to proceed against a respondent in compulsory liquidation despite being reminded on multiple occasions, and failed to respond to strike-out warning letter.

Facts

The claimant brought a claim against a respondent that was in compulsory liquidation. The tribunal wrote to the claimant on 11 June 2024 informing him that he needed court permission to proceed given the respondent's insolvency status. A reminder was sent on 12 December 2024 but the claimant did not respond. A strike-out warning letter was sent on 7 January 2025 requiring a response by 21 January 2025, but the claimant again failed to respond.

Decision

The tribunal struck out the claim under rule 38(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunals Procedure Rules 2024 on the basis that the claim was not being actively pursued. The claimant had failed to obtain the necessary court permission to proceed against an insolvent respondent and failed to respond to multiple tribunal communications including a specific strike-out warning.

Practical note

Claimants must obtain court permission before pursuing employment tribunal claims against companies in compulsory liquidation, and failure to respond to tribunal correspondence or take required procedural steps will result in strike-out for non-pursuit.

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

Employment Tribunals Procedure Rules 2024 rule 38Employment Tribunals Procedure Rules 2024 rule 38(1)(d)

Case details

Case number
8000399/2024
Decision date
23 January 2025
Hearing type
strike out
Hearing days
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Sector
Represented
No

Claimant representation

Represented
No