Ms N Pennycook v Ryscot Limited (now dissolved) — 2019

The claimant had brought multiple claims against Ryscot Limited, but the respondent was dissolved in January 2018. The tribunal recorded that since that date it had been impossible to hear the claim against an entity with no legal existence.

The case had previously been sisted to allow the claimant time to consider her options. In May 2018, Judge d’Inverno explained that she could either obtain a court order restoring the respondent to the register or apply to amend the claim to include another respondent. In March 2019, the tribunal again left the proceedings alive briefly for the same purpose and the claimant was advised on 27 June that if she did not take one of those steps the claim would likely be dismissed as having no reasonable prospects of success.

The claimant did not take either step. Her later correspondence made clear that she wished to pursue the claim but did not indicate that she would seek restoration of the respondent or amendment to add another respondent. She also said she believed the tribunal was at fault in not preventing the respondent being struck off, but the tribunal said there was no legal provision allowing it to intervene.

The tribunal accepted that there is a public policy interest in discrimination claims being considered, but concluded that the legal position remained that it could not hear a claim against a respondent that no longer existed. As the claimant had not taken either of the steps identified earlier, the claim was struck out on 31 July 2019 as having no reasonable prospect of success.