Case 2400937/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Parsonage v All Saints Construction (in compulsory liquidation) — 2024
- Case reference
- 2400937/2022
- Decision date
- 5 January 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Eeley
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Parsonage
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Eeley struck out the claim. The judgment records that the respondent, All Saints Construction (in compulsory liquidation), was in compulsory liquidation and that the permission of the court had not been obtained for the proceedings to be instituted or continued as required by the Insolvency Act 1986.
The tribunal also noted that it had given the claimant opportunities on 27 October 2023 and 7 December 2023 to provide written reasons within 14 days why the claim should not be struck out for not having been actively pursued. The claimant did not give an acceptable reason.
The claim was therefore struck out under rule 37(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. The judgment does not record any substantive determination of the underlying employment claims or any monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The claim was struck out because the respondent was in compulsory liquidation and permission of the court had not been obtained for the proceedings to be instituted or continued under the Insolvency Act 1986. The tribunal also recorded that the claimant was given opportunities on 27 October 2023 and 7 December 2023 to provide written reasons why the claim should not be struck out for lack of active pursuit, but no acceptable reason was provided. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 37(1)(d) Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- Insolvency Act 1986
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.