Case 6011618/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr K Taylor v Intelligent Building Group Ltd (In Creditors Voluntary Liquidation) — 2026
- Case reference
- 6011618/2025
- Decision date
- 3 June 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge KM Ross
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr K Taylor
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal struck out Mr K Taylor's claim against Intelligent Building Group Ltd (In Creditors Voluntary Liquidation). It had written to Mr Taylor on 2 January 2026 about the respondent's insolvency and the Government Insolvency Fund and asked whether he wished to proceed, but he did not reply. A further letter dated 16 April 2026 warned that the claim might be struck out because it appeared not to have been actively pursued and gave him an opportunity to explain; he again did not reply.
Mr Taylor also failed to attend the final hearing listed for 3 and 4 June 2026. Employment Judge KM Ross was satisfied that the grounds for striking out under Rules 38 and 47 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 applied and that striking out accorded with the overriding objective in Rule 3. The claim was therefore struck out without a remedy being awarded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The claim was struck out without determination of its merits because it had not been actively pursued and the claimant failed to attend the final hearing. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
- Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
- overriding objective in Rule 3 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
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.