Mr G Matthews v Terex Pegson Coalville and others: 2603601/2020
JUDGMENT
[1]The proceedings against the first and third respondents are dismissed.[2]The claim against the second respondent is unaffected by this judgmentREASONS
[1]In the ET3 response filed on behalf of all three respondents, the second respondent accepted it was the claimant’s employer and is the correct respondent to the claims. It sought the dismissal of the claim against the first and third respondents.[2]The first respondent is a trading name only of the second respondent. The third respondent is a separate legal entity within the wider group of companies but, it was asserted, is not active and had no connection with the claimant’s employment.[3]On 26 November 2020 the tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to comment on that application and has failed to respond. The respondents’ contentions are accepted and the claims dismissed accordingly. Employment Judge Clark 8/12/2020 Case No: 2603601/2020 Page 1 of 1 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Mr G Matthews Respondent: Terex GB Ltd On: 30 June 2021 Before: Employment Judge Ahmed (sitting alone) Representation Claimant: Mr Max Gordon of Counsel Respondent: Mr Piers Martin of Counsel