Case 2404389/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss E Beardwood v Unique Training Group Ltd (in compulsory liquidation) — 2024
- Case reference
- 2404389/2023
- Decision date
- 20 May 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Eeley
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss E Beardwood
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Employment Tribunal struck out Miss E Beardwood's claim against Unique Training Group Ltd (in compulsory liquidation). The tribunal recorded that the respondent company 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.
On 11 April 2024, the tribunal gave the claimant 14 days to provide written reasons why the claim should not be struck out for want of active pursuit. The claimant did not provide an acceptable reason.
The tribunal therefore struck out the claim under rule 37(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. No remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment does not separate outcomes by individual head of claim; it struck out the claim as a whole. | Struck out | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The judgment does not separate outcomes by individual head of claim; it struck out the claim as a whole. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 37(1)(d) of the 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.