Ms M Vetriano v Jack David Harris Decorators Ltd and Decorating Contractors Ltd: 2305347/2021
JUDGMENT
[1]The Tribunal declares that the 1st Respondent has failed to comply with regulation 13 of TUPE 2006 and orders the 1st Respondent to pay compensation of £8,250.06 in respect of that breach pursuant to regulation 15.[2]The claims for unfair dismissal and breach of regulation 13 against the 2nd Respondent are stayed because the 2nd Respondent company is in compulsory liquidation. The Insolvency Act 1986 provides that legal proceedings cannot be instituted or continued against the company without the permission of the court. Employment Judge Reed Date: 29th July 2022 Case Number: 2305347/2021 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Ms M Vetriano Respondent: 1. Jack David Harris Decorators Limited (In liquidation) 2. Decorating Contractors Limited (In liquidation)REASONS
[1]The Tribunal wrote to the claimant on 26 January 2026 warning them that the Tribunal was considering striking out the claim. This was because it appeared to the Tribunal, applying Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024, that• the claim had not been actively pursued;[2]The letter gave the claimant an opportunity to explain why the claim should not be struck out, or to request a hearing at which to do so. The claimant has not replied.[3]I am satisfied that the grounds for striking out the claim under Rule 38 apply, and that it would be in accordance with the overriding objective in Rule 3 to strike out the claim. This is because no action has been taken on the claim for over 3 years.[4]The claim is therefore struck out. Approved by: