Case 3314753/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P William v EG 2023 Limited (in administration) — 2024
- Case reference
- 3314753/2022
- Decision date
- 7 May 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Anstis Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P William
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out the claim. It recorded 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.
The tribunal also noted that on 8 April 2024 it gave 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.
Employment Judge Anstis therefore struck out the claim on 7 May 2024. No remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not identify the substantive claim type. It records that the respondent was in administration, that consent of the Administrator or permission of the court had not been obtained under the Insolvency Act 1986, and that the claimant did not provide an acceptable reason after being given an opportunity 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.