Respondent ET3 Timelimit Extension

[Benny8902]

Hi,

Have just received the respondent's ET3 it includes grounds of resistance as expected as well as extension to time-limit.

I am looking to have the tribunal make a ruling that either strikes out or rejects the respondent's time-limit extension.

Their emails states they received the ET1 7 days ago, and complying with a proper response (Their ET3 denies all claims as expect) would prejudice them if they had to respond to the ET1 by tomorrow 10th Jan 2024.

I am looking to respond and basically, object to their application and state that on x date, I made clear and concise communication through email that the respondent should seek legal advice, and the same on another date

Then on x date I also made a declaration that they had opened themselves up to litigation.

I was looking to reference this in my objection email, and include the documents and reference the specific points so the judge could make a decision, to show that they are in fact using delay tactics and this is not in favour of justice. They have had ample time to prepare a defense and have been forewarned about litigation. So I would ask the ET rejects their application for time-limit extension by a further 28 days.

Would this be allowed? Can I provide copies of the emails and the grievance which mentioned they opened themselves upto litigation?

I don't see why this wouldn't allowed, as they have submitted a grounds of resistance which denies everything.

Thank you.

[atticus]

In my experience courts and tribunals are sympathetic to applications for more time when the original period of time included all or part of the Christmas and New Year period.

[Benny8902]

Hi atticus

I did find some case law, which granted the extension based on the Christmas period.

But I also found more case law, which supports my position in them not being granted an extension to their ET3 as their application for extension after being forewarned by the claimant was not a justifiable reason for their extension request as they had knowledge that the claimaint would litigate the matters (Discrimination, harassment, whistleblowing).

I looked at it in the manner of their application does not seem in the fairness of justice, it seems more of a delay tactic which they attempted multiple times when I originally went through the grievance processes.

worth a shot?

[atticus]

What do you think is the chance that in due course you may need some flexibility from the other party? Remember that sometimes in life the unexpected happens and gets in the way.

What is the tone that you want to set?

[ULA]

It is highly likely that the completion of the ET3 and a limited detail Grounds of Resistance (GoR) was to ensure they got something back to the ET in the timescale. Their time limit extension will probably be to allow time to prepare a more detailed GoR response to your ET1.

The ET has a responsibility to ensure justice for both parties and as atticus points out we have recently gone though a period of business closures/operating on reduced staff for a period. Even if you have forewarned until a company actually gets an ET1 they cannot be sure an employee/ex-employee will actually make a claim.

By all means ask the Tribunal to resist the application for the time-limit extension but you are unlikely to get a Strike Out as they have submitted the ET3 and a limited GoR in the timescale.

[Benny8902]

The GoR is not so much limited. It basically denies all claims and provides no reason its a standard GoR

And after DSA I found out they are intentionally attempting to delay everything and anything.

Sure they could make a defence about Christmas period however this wouldnt be viable? As I have evidence (signed from an employee) they actually received the ET1 on 17th Decemember. The SAR states, delay and on 9th state we received on this date instead.

[atticus]

That sounds like a holding defence, which they now wish to replace with something more detailed.

[Benny8902]

Yeah holding defence but it would not be wise to contest this as clear evidence shows that they have lied to tribunal about when received ET1?

[ULA]

All you can do is make an application to the Tribunal not to agree for a time extension for the respondent to submit a more details GoR,.clearly setting out your reasons for this.

It will then be down to the Tribunal to make a decision.

[Benny8902]

They got rejected in extension.

So what next?

[ULA]

Sorry do you mean the respondent's request for a time extension was rejected?

If so then the ET3 and GoR they did submit in time will be their response to your ET3.

[Benny8902]

Hi, yes was blocked. They denied everything in the ET3 and admitted to some discrimination. So it's good.

[ULA]

Were you sent the ET3 and GoR by the Tribunal or were you copied in by the respondent when they sent it to the ET?.