Case 2407180/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Gilmore v Direct Supply Limited (in creditors voluntary liquidation) — 2024
- Case reference
- 2407180/2022
- Decision date
- 22 March 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dunlop
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Gilmore
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy a letter dated 31 January 2024, the tribunal gave the insolvency practitioners an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing as to why the response should not be struck out for not having been actively pursued. The respondent did not make written representations, or did not make any sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing.
The tribunal therefore struck out the response. The judgment does not record any determination of the underlying substantive claims on their merits, and it does not record any monetary award. The respondent was stated to remain entitled to notice of any hearings and decisions, but would only be entitled to participate in any hearing to the extent permitted by the Employment Judge.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment struck out the respondent's response because it had not been actively pursued and no sufficient representations or hearing request were made. The judgment did not determine the underlying substantive claim(s) on their merits. | 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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.