Case 3333942/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Vice v Omega Travel Limited (In Liquidation) — 2020
- Case reference
- 3333942/2018
- Decision date
- 7 August 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Laidler Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Vice
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant presented these proceedings on 8 October 2018 as claims for a redundancy payment and unpaid wages. The respondent entered compulsory liquidation on 12 November 2018. At the remote hearing on 31 July 2020, the respondent did not attend and was not represented. The tribunal recorded that the claimant had already been paid a statutory redundancy payment and had received approximately £3,000 in respect of wages due to him.
The tribunal did not decide either claim on the merits. It noted that, under s.124 Insolvency Act 1986, no action or proceedings may be instituted or continued against a company in compulsory liquidation without leave of the court that made the winding-up order. The tribunal therefore stayed the proceedings. It also recorded that a letter from Employment Judge Foxwell dated 9 March 2019 had confirmed that the only claims in the claim form were redundancy payment and unpaid wages, and that any new claims against different individuals or parties would require fresh early conciliation and fresh proceedings.
The tribunal said there were no other proceedings in the action on the material before it, but gave the claimant time to consider his position. If he wished to pursue matters further, he would need to apply for leave of the court that made the winding-up order and confirm what claim he was pursuing. The matter was to be reviewed within three months of the reasons being sent to the parties.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The tribunal did not determine this claim on the merits. It recorded that the claimant had already been paid a statutory redundancy payment and stayed the proceedings because the respondent was in compulsory liquidation and leave of the winding-up court was required to continue. | Other | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal did not determine this claim on the merits. It recorded that the claimant had received approximately £3,000 in respect of wages due and stayed the proceedings because the respondent was in compulsory liquidation and leave of the winding-up court was required to continue. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.124 Insolvency Act 1986
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.