Case 1600271/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs J Abbott & others (see attached schedule) v Kullar Hotels Limited (in voluntary liquidation) — 2020
- Case reference
- 1600271/2018
- Decision date
- 30 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Jenkins Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs J Abbott & others (see attached schedule)
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis document is a reconsideration judgment in case 1600271/2018 and related listed claims. The Claimants' application dated 2 April 2020 sought reconsideration of the judgment sent to the parties on 30 March 2020. Employment Judge S Jenkins refused the application.
The reasons state that Mr Leigh Allen's email indicated he had not received any communication from the Tribunal asking for reasons why the claims should not be dismissed for not having been actively pursued. The Judge also recorded that the Respondent was in voluntary liquidation and that no application had been made to restore it to the register.
On that basis, the Judge held that there was no reasonable prospect of the original decision being varied or revoked. No monetary award or other remedy is recorded in this judgment, and the text does not set out the substantive merits of the underlying claims beyond the fact that reconsideration was sought against the earlier decision.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment refuses the Claimants' application dated 2 April 2020 for reconsideration of the judgment sent on 30 March 2020. The underlying substantive claims are not set out in this reconsideration decision; the reasons record that the respondent was in liquidation, that no application had been made to restore it to the register, and that there was no reasonable prospect of the original decision being varied or revoked. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.