Employer file
Since 2017, ’ lodged their ET s. Overriding Objective 52. The Tribunal considered that refusal of the application to amend was in accordance with the overriding objective.15 53. The amendment seeks to introduce new claims which proceed on a factual basis contrary to the claims as currently pled. Further, the claims would require response by the has appeared as a respondent in 1 employment tribunal case, with £0 in total awards recorded against the employer.
| # | Claim type | Cases |
|---|---|---|
| 01 | Breach of contract | 1 |
| 02 | Redundancy | 1 |
| 03 | Unfair dismissal | 1 |
| 04 | Working time regulations | 1 |
| Case ref. | Decided | Jurisdiction | Claimant | Claim types | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4103802/2022 | 13 April 2023 | Scotland | (sitting alone)5 Mr J Taylor | Breach of contract, Redundancy, Unfair dismissal, Working time regulations | — |
Data extracted from published employment tribunal judgments on gov.uk. Case reference, decision date, judge, venue and claim categories come from structured metadata. Claimant and respondent names are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Outcomes and compensation are not yet populated for every case — see how the data is built.