Case 2400464/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr T Duffy v Total Glass Ltd (in administration) — 2021
- Case reference
- 2400464/2020
- Decision date
- 8 July 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phil Allen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr T Duffy
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal recorded that Total Glass Ltd was in administration. It found that the claimant had not informed the Tribunal that he had obtained either the consent of the Administrator or permission of the court for the proceedings to continue, as required by the Insolvency Act 1986.
By letter dated 14 June 2021, the Tribunal gave Mr Duffy an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing on why the claim should not be struck out for not having been actively pursued. The claimant did not make representations and did not give an acceptable reason.
On that basis, Employment Judge Phil Allen struck out the claim. The judgment does not record any substantive determination of the merits of the underlying claim or any monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not specify the underlying substantive cause(s) of action. The claim was struck out because the respondent was in administration and the claimant had not shown consent of the administrator or permission of the court to continue the proceedings under the Insolvency Act 1986. The claimant also failed to respond to the Tribunal's letter of 14 June 2021 inviting representations or a hearing on strike out for want 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.