Case 2410452/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Hayes v Hashtag Hotels Limited (in administration) — 2020
- Case reference
- 2410452/2019
- Decision date
- 7 August 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Horne
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Hayes
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out Mr A Hayes's claim against Hashtag Hotels Limited (in administration). Employment Judge Horne recorded 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 noted that on 16 June 2020 the claimant was given an opportunity to provide written reasons why the claim should not be struck out for having not been actively pursued. The claimant did not reply.
For those reasons, the tribunal ordered that the claim be struck out. No substantive liability finding or monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The tribunal struck out the claim because the respondent was in administration and the required consent of the administrator or permission of the court had not been obtained. The claimant was also given an opportunity on 16 June 2020 to explain why the claim should not be struck out for want of active pursuit, but did not reply. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.