Case 2402116/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v ABS Restoration Ltd (In Administration) — 2024
- Case reference
- 2402116/2023
- Decision date
- 18 January 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Holmes Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningIn case nos. 2402116/2023 and 2401855/2023, the tribunal struck out the claims against ABS Restoration Limited (in administration). It found that the respondent company was in administration and that neither the consent of the Administrator nor the 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 recorded that on 6 December 2023 the claimants had been given an opportunity to provide written reasons why the claims should not be struck out for not having been actively pursued. The claimants did not give an acceptable reason, so the claims were struck out. The judgment records no merits findings and no monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Case 2402116/2023. The extracted text does not state the underlying substantive claim type. The tribunal struck the claim out because the respondent company was in administration and neither the Administrator's consent nor the court's permission had been obtained, and because the claimants did not give an acceptable reason after being asked on 6 December 2023 to explain why the claim should not be struck out for not having been actively pursued. | Struck out | — | — |
| Other | Case 2401855/2023. The extracted text does not state the underlying substantive claim type. The tribunal struck the claim out because the respondent company was in administration and neither the Administrator's consent nor the court's permission had been obtained, and because the claimants did not give an acceptable reason after being asked on 6 December 2023 to explain why the claim should not be struck out for not having been actively pursued. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Insolvency Act 1986
- not actively pursued
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.