[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> PACM Ltd v Kyraicou & Anor [2005] UKEAT 0812_04_0402 (4 February 2005) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2005/0812_04_0402.html Cite as: [2005] UKEAT 812_4_402, [2005] UKEAT 0812_04_0402

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

APPEARANCES

 

For the Appellant	No Appearance or Representation By or on Behalf of the Appellant
For the Respondents	No Appearance or Representation By or on Behalf of the Respondents

SUMMARY

Contract of Employment

Withdrawal of appeal and company in Administration


 


MR JUSTICE SILBER

1. On 4th June 2004 the Employment Tribunal sitting at Shrewsbury, heard claims by Andrew Kyraicou and Alan Locket, claiming that their former employer PACM Ltd, owed them arrears of salary by two separate decisions dated 17 June 2004. The Employment Tribunal ordered the Appellant, PACM Ltd to pay Mr Kyraicou £790 and Mr Locket £843.23.
2. PACM Ltd duly appealed on the grounds that it had not received either on notification of the applications made, or notification that the claims made by Mr Kyraicou and Mr Locket were to be listed by the Employment Tribunal as 'Notice of appearance not entered.' Another ground of appeal, was that they had not received notice of the hearing.
3. By Orders made by the Registrar of this Appeal Tribunal on 6 December 2004, it was ordered that unless Mr Kyraicou and Mr Locket lodged an Answer to the Notice of Appeal within seven days of the date of that order, they would be debarred from taking any further part in the appeal. Mr Kyraicou and Mr Locket did not serve such notice, and so on 20 December 2004 the Registrar ordered that Mr Kyraicou and Mr Locket be debarred from taking any further part in the appeal.
4. Subsequently, this Tribunal received a letter dated 27 January 2005 from PACM Ltd, stating that that company had gone into Administration, and that it was in the final stages of deciding who the administrators would be. It pointed out, the Company had ceased trading on 5 November 2004.The letter also stated that PACM Ltd was unable to attend the hearing scheduled for today, due to financial constraints. The letter ended with the words:

"we therefore think it is only prudent at this stage that we withdraw the appeal"

5. Mr Kyraicou has subsequently been contacted by this Tribunal, and has agreed to that course. Attempts to contact Mr Locket have been unsuccessful.
6. We order that the appeals be withdrawn. Liberty is given to Mr Locket and Mr Kyraicou to apply for any further orders if they wish to do so provided that they first give notice to the Appellant.