Redundancy cases against ’ 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

Tribunal Watch has indexed 1 case involving redundancy claims against ’ 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, out of 1 total case on record for this employer. See also all redundancy cases across every employer.

Redundancy cases: 1
Total awarded: —
Share of employer caseload: 100%

All redundancy cases against ’ 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

1 case · chronological

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	—

Methodology

This page lists the subset of ’ 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's tribunal cases tagged with redundancy in the §4.4 claim-type taxonomy. A single judgment frequently combines multiple claim types, so the same case may appear on more than one claim-type page. Award figures are taken from the remedy section of each judgment where present; cases without a quantified award — because the tribunal only determined liability, or because the remedy hearing is pending — are listed with no award amount. See how the data is built.

Redundancy cases against ’ 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 — employment tribunal data | Tribunal Watch