Loading page content.
TopEmployer × claim type
Tribunal Watch has indexed 1 case involving working time regulations claims against ’ submissions were to the effect that the application should not be refused solely because there has been delay in making it as amendments may be made at any stage of the proceedings. Delay in making the application is a discretionary factor. It is relevant to consider why the application was not made earlier. The amendment application was made shortly after the, out of 1 total case on record for this employer. See also all working time regulations cases across every employer.
| 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 | — |
This page lists the subset of ’ submissions were to the effect that the application should not be refused solely because there has been delay in making it as amendments may be made at any stage of the proceedings. Delay in making the application is a discretionary factor. It is relevant to consider why the application was not made earlier. The amendment application was made shortly after the's tribunal cases tagged with working time regulations 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.