Crouch v Ant Marketing & Others - Response form clearly covered both named Respondents [2011] EAT

It is desirable that, where a Response is entered on behalf of two respondents, it expressly states this at the appropriate point on the ET3 form; however it is sufficient that it is clear, from the entirety of the Response, that it is intended to be on behalf of both respondents.

Telesales operative Mr Crouch was dismissed. He presented an ET1 to the employment tribunal which named both Ant Marketing and a Mr Jones as Respondents. There were 5 claims detailed, only one of which was against Ant and Mr Jones (a disability discrimination claim).

The full content of this page is available to subscribers only. Please purchase a subscription if you feel this content will be of use to you.

Login or subscribe (includes subscription information) to access the full content of this page.