Case 2411791/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Laidler v Design Promotion and Marketing Services Limited (in Liquidation) — 2024
- Case reference
- 2411791/2023
- Decision date
- 9 August 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Feeney REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Laidler
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr D Laidler, brought a redundancy-related claim against Design Promotion and Marketing Services Limited (in Liquidation). The hearing was before Employment Judge Feeney at Manchester by CVP on 8 August 2024, with the claimant appearing in person and the respondent not in attendance.
The only decision recorded in the written judgment was on time limits. The tribunal held that the claim was out of time, but it was nevertheless permitted to proceed because the judge exercised the just and equitable discretion in the claimant's favour.
No findings on the underlying merits of the redundancy claim were recorded in this judgment, and no monetary award was made. The judgment states that reasons were given orally at the hearing, but no written reasons were provided in the published record.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Preliminary limitation decision only. The tribunal held the claim was out of time but allowed it to proceed on the exercise of the just and equitable discretion. No merits decision or remedy was recorded in this judgment. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- just and equitable discretion
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.