Mr C Davis and others v Grahame Davis: 3302891/2020 and others

EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS

Case No 3302891/2020, 3302892/2020, 3302893/2020

Between

Mr C Davis and othersClaimant

Grahame DavisRespondent

Before

Employment Judge Vowles

Date 4 February 2022

JUDGMENT

Made under rule 37 of Schedule 1 to the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013

[1]The claims against Grahame Davis are dismissed.

REASONS

[1]On 31 July 2020 the Tribunal wrote to the Claimants to inform them that an Employment Judge was considering striking out the claims because the claims against Grahame Davis had no reasonable prospect of success, as the Claimants do not appear to have been employed by him.

[2]The Claimants were given until 24 August 2020 to explain in writing why the claims against Grahame Davis should not be dismissed. The Claimants have responded that they wish to pursue the company Moto-Build Limited rather than Grahame Davis.

[3]The claims against Grahame Davis therefore stand dismissed from 24 August 2020.

[4]Claims against Moto-Build Limited are stayed as explained in a separate letter from the Tribunal. I confirm that this is my Judgment in the case of Mr C Davis, Miss L Davis and Mr J Loveridge v Grahame Davis and that I have dated the Judgment and signed by electronic signature. _____________________________ Employment Judge Vowles Date: 21 September 2020 Sent to the parties on: Case No: 3302891/2020 3302892/2020 3302893/2020 Page 2 of 2 19/10/2020 N Gotecha For the Tribunals Office Case Number: 3302891/2020 3302892/2020 3302893/2020 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Mr C Davis Miss L Davis Mr J Loveridge Respondent: Moto-Build Limited ( In Liquidation)

[1]The respondent company is in compulsory liquidation. The permission of the court has not been obtained for these proceedings to be instituted or continued as required by the Insolvency Act 1986.

[2]On 18 October 2020 the Tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to give written reasons within 14 days why the claim should not be struck out as it had not been actively pursued. The claimant has failed to give an acceptable reason. The claim is therefore struck out.