Case 3304174/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Pillinger v Supremia International Limited (in administration) — 2022
- Case reference
- 3304174/2020
- Decision date
- 19 January 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Maxwell Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Pillinger
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Claimant, Mr S Pillinger, brought a claim against Supremia International Limited (in administration). On 18 October 2021 the Tribunal stayed the claim so that the Claimant could obtain the Administrator’s consent for the proceedings to continue, or permission from the court.
The Tribunal recorded that the Claimant subsequently wrote to the Administrator seeking consent, but that request was refused. There was no evidence that the Claimant had applied to the court for permission.
In those circumstances, and while accepting that the Administrator’s position was outside the Claimant’s control, the Tribunal concluded that the claim was not being actively pursued. It therefore dismissed the claim pursuant to rule 37(1)(d).
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment did not determine the claim on its merits. It states that the Claimant’s claim was dismissed pursuant to rule 37(1)(d) because, after a stay for administration-related consent or permission, the claim was not being actively pursued. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.