Case 8000399/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Number: 8000399/2024 Mr K Fabiniak v First Endeavour LLP (In Compulsory Liquidation) — 2025
- Case reference
- 8000399/2024
- Decision date
- 21 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Kemp Case
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Number: 8000399/2024 Mr K Fabiniak
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 11 June 2024 the tribunal wrote to Mr Fabiniak to say that he needed permission to proceed because First Endeavour LLP was in compulsory liquidation. A further reminder was sent on 12 December 2024, but no confirmation of consent was received.
The tribunal then issued a strike-out warning letter on 7 January 2025, requiring a response by 21 January 2025 or a request for a hearing. No reply or reasons were received, and Employment Judge Kemp struck out the claim under rule 38 of the Employment Tribunals Procedure Rules 2024 on the ground that it had not been actively pursued, relying on rule 38(1)(d). No merits issues or monetary award were decided.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Struck out under rule 38(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunals Procedure Rules 2024 because the claim was not actively pursued; no merits determination was made. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Struck out under rule 38(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunals Procedure Rules 2024 because the claim was not actively pursued; no merits determination was made. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 38 of the Employment Tribunals Procedure Rules 2024
- rule 38(1)(d)
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.