Case 2500564/2023 · Employment Tribunal
1. Mrs G Thompson 2. Miss J Cottiss 3. Ms A M Cottiss v E. Hoults (in compulsory liquidation) — 2024
- Case reference
- 2500564/2023
- Decision date
- 2 January 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Aspden
Parties
2 namedClaimant
1. Mrs G Thompson 2. Miss J Cottiss 3. Ms A M Cottiss
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal struck out the claims brought by Mrs G Thompson, Miss J Cottiss and Ms A M Cottiss against E Hoults (Howdon) Ltd (in compulsory liquidation). It said the respondent company was in compulsory liquidation and that 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 recorded that, on 13 December 2023, it gave the claimants 14 days to provide written reasons why the claims should not be struck out for not being actively pursued. The claimants did not provide an acceptable reason, and the claims were therefore struck out. No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not identify the substantive claim type. It records that the claims in case nos. 2500564/2023, 2500565/2023 and 2500566/2023 were struck out because the respondent was in compulsory liquidation, permission of the court had not been obtained under the Insolvency Act 1986, and the claimants did not give an acceptable reason after the Tribunal's 13 December 2023 notice. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.