Case 3322556/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Clotoe v EVCL Chill Limited (in administration) — 2025
- Case reference
- 3322556/2021
- Decision date
- 11 April 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Alliott Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Clotoe
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out Mr S Clotoe's claim against EVCL Chill Limited (in administration). It recorded that the respondent company was in administration and that neither the Administrator's consent nor permission of the court had been obtained for the proceedings to continue, as required by the Insolvency Act 1986.
The tribunal also noted that on 25 July 2022 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.
On those grounds, the tribunal concluded that the claim should be struck out. No liability findings or monetary remedy were made.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment strikes out the claim as a whole; no separate merits findings are made on this claim. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment strikes out the claim as a whole; no separate merits findings are made on this claim. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Insolvency Act 1986
- strike out for failure to actively pursue
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.