Case 3201019/2017 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Spiralite Holdings Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 3201019/2017
- Decision date
- 13 January 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Taylor Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment records that the respondent company was in administration and that neither the Administrator's consent nor the permission of the court had been obtained for the proceedings to be instituted or continued, as required by the Insolvency Act 1986. On that basis the tribunal held that the claim could not proceed.
The tribunal also noted that on 13 May 2019 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.
The result was that the claim was struck out. No substantive liability findings or monetary remedy were recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment strikes out the claim because the respondent company is in administration and neither the consent of the Administrator nor the permission of the court had been obtained, and because the claimant failed to give an acceptable reason after being given an opportunity on 13 May 2019 to explain why the claim should not be struck out for lack of active pursuit. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.