Case 2301926/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr B Johnson v Roger Lee Reeder — 2023
- Case reference
- 2301926/2020
- Decision date
- 30 October 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Taylor Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr B Johnson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out Mr B Johnson's claim against Roger Lee Reeder. The reason given was that the respondent company had been dissolved and the claimant had not applied to have it restored to the Register of Companies.
The tribunal also recorded that on 4 July 2022 it gave the claimant an opportunity to provide written reasons why the claim should not be struck out because it had not been actively pursued. The claimant did not provide an acceptable reason.
On that basis, the tribunal concluded that the claim should be struck out. No substantive determination of liability or remedy was 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 substantive cause of action; it only states that 'the claim is struck out'. The claim was struck out because the respondent company had been dissolved, the claimant had not applied to restore it to the Register of Companies, and the claimant failed to give an acceptable reason after being given an opportunity to explain why the claim should not be struck out for lack of active pursuit. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.