R1 and R2

Case Summary

The claim against the Second Respondent was not presented within the applicable time limit, but it is just and equitable to extend the time limit. The claim against the Second Respondent will therefore proceed.

The claim against the Second Respondent was initially filed outside the applicable time limit, but the tribunal exercised its discretion to extend the time limit on the basis that it was just and equitable to do so, allowing the claim to proceed.

• •the claim against the Second Respondent was not presented within the applicable time limit, but it is just and equitable to extend the time limit

Case No: 2401433/2024 1 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: C1 Respondents: R1 R2 Heard at: Liverpool (by CVP) On: 23 rd October 2024 Before: Employment Judge Greer REPRESENTATION: For the claimant: Mr Caeser (a solicitor) For the first respondent: Mr Timm (counsel) For the Second Respondent: Ms Shah (counsel) PRELIMINARY HEARING IN PUBLIC JUDGMENT 1. The claim against the Second Respondent was not presented within the applicable time limit, but it is just and equitable to extend the time limit. The claim against the Second Respondent will therefore proceed. Employment Judge Greer 9 th November 2024 Case No: 2401433/2024 2 Judgment sent to the parties on: 11 November 2024 For the Tribunal: Note Reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing. Written reasons will not be provided unless a party asked for them at the hearing or a party makes a written request within 14 days of the sending of this written record of the decision. Public access to employment tribunal decisions Judgments (apart from judgments under rule 52) and reasons for the judgments are published, in full, online at www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions shortly after a copy has been sent to the claimant(s) and respondent(s) in a case.