Case 2603753/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs M Begley v The Edinburgh Woollen Mill (Group) Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2603753/2020
- Decision date
- 27 September 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Adkinson
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs M Begley
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out Mrs M Begley's claim against Edinburgh Woollen Mill Ltd (In Administration). The judgment records that Employment Judge Adkinson had previously directed, by letter dated 22 January 2022, that because the respondent was in administration, proceedings could not be instituted or continued without permission of the Court or administrator under schedule B1 paragraph 43(6) of the Insolvency Act 1986. The case was therefore stayed for six months pending the administration ending, administrator consent, or Court permission.
The tribunal contacted the claimant on 9 August 2022 and asked her to provide an update by 16 August 2022, but no response was received. A strike out warning was then sent to the parties, warning the claimant that the tribunal was considering striking out the claim because it was not being actively pursued and inviting written reasons or a hearing request by 23 September 2022. The claimant did not reply and no representations were received.
The tribunal found that the claimant had failed to make representations explaining why the claim should not be struck out on the ground that it had not been actively pursued. The claim was therefore struck out. No remedy was awarded or addressed in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment records that the claim was struck out because it was not being actively pursued, but the extracted judgment text does not identify the substantive cause or causes of action. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- The Insolvency Act 1986 schedule B1 paragraph 43(6)
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.