Case 2601480/2016 · Employment Tribunal
Mr K Z Khan v CE Security — 2022
- Case reference
- 2601480/2016
- Decision date
- 12 April 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Lewis Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr K Z Khan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out the claim against CE Security. It 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 12 April 2022 it had given the claimant an opportunity to provide written reasons why the claim should not be struck out because it had not been actively pursued. The claimant did not provide an acceptable reason.
No merits findings were made and no monetary remedy was awarded. The only recorded outcome was that the claim was struck out.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment did not identify separate substantive causes of action; the whole claim was struck out on procedural grounds because the respondent was in administration and required consent or permission had not been obtained, and because the claimant did not give an acceptable reason after being invited to explain why the claim should not be struck out for lack of active pursuit. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.