Case 1403464/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Youngman v The Bristol, Gloucestershire, Somerset And Wiltshire Community Rehabilitation Company Limited (In Administration) — 2019
- Case reference
- 1403464/2018
- Decision date
- 13 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Pirani Dated
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Youngman
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out the claim. It recorded that the respondent company was in administration and that neither the consent of the administrator nor permission of the court had been obtained for the proceedings to be instituted or continued, as required by the Insolvency Act 1986.
The tribunal also noted that on 17 October 2019 the claimant was given an opportunity to provide written reasons why the claim should not be struck out for failure actively to pursue it. The claimant did not provide an acceptable reason. On that basis, the tribunal held that the claim should be struck out.
No remedy was awarded and no merits findings were made in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not identify the underlying cause of action; it states only that the claim was struck out because the respondent was in administration without the required consent or court permission, and because the claimant failed to give an acceptable reason after being invited to do so. | Struck out | — | — |
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.