Case 3305956/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs N Chekhronova v Remus Corporation UK Limited (in compulsory liquidation) — 2023
- Case reference
- 3305956/2021
- Decision date
- 30 October 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Taylor Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs N Chekhronova
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Taylor dated 30 October 2023. The tribunal struck out Mrs N Chekhronova's claim against Remus Corporation UK Ltd. The written reasons state that the respondent company was in compulsory liquidation and that the permission of the court had not been obtained for the proceedings to be instituted or continued, as required by the Insolvency Act 1986.
The tribunal also recorded that on 21 September 2022 the claimant was given an opportunity to provide written reasons within 14 days explaining why the claim should not be struck out for not being actively pursued. The claimant failed to give an acceptable reason. On that basis, the tribunal concluded that the claim should be struck out.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The tribunal struck out the claim in full. It recorded that the respondent company was in compulsory liquidation and that the court's permission had not been obtained for the proceedings to be instituted or continued as required by the Insolvency Act 1986. It also noted that, after an order of 21 September 2022 inviting written reasons within 14 days why the claim should not be struck out for lack of active pursuit, the claimant did not give 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.