Case 3302019/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr T Selvarajah v Pluscrates Limited (in administration) — 2025
- Case reference
- 3302019/2023
- Decision date
- 1 April 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Quill
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr T Selvarajah
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out the claim. It recorded that the respondent company was in administration and that the proceedings could not continue without the consent of the administrator or the permission of the court, neither of which had been obtained, as required by the Insolvency Act 1986.
The tribunal also noted that on 2 January 2025 it gave the claimant an opportunity to provide written reasons why the claim should not be struck out for failure to be actively pursued. The claimant did not provide an acceptable reason, and the tribunal therefore struck out the claim. The judgment is signed by Employment Judge Quill and dated 14 March 2025, with the judgment sent to the parties on 1 April 2025.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment strikes out the claim as a whole. It states 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 continue, as required by the Insolvency Act 1986. It also records that the claimant was given an opportunity on 2 January 2025 to explain why the claim should not be struck out for lack of active pursuit, but did not provide an acceptable reason. | 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.