ET3 grounds for resisting claim—health and safety detriment

The following Employment precedent provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering:

  • ET3 grounds for resisting claim—health and safety detriment

ET3 grounds for resisting claim—health and safety detriment

[Insert in para 6.1 of claim form ET3:]

    1. 1

      It is denied that the Respondent subjected the Claimant to a detriment under section 44 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 as alleged or at all. It is:

      1. 1.1

        [not true that the Respondent took no action on the Claimant's complaint concerning unsafe [machinery OR working practices] at the Respondent's premises. The Respondent investigated the matter thoroughly [specify details, eg by instructing a health and safety consultant to examine the machinery/working practices to see if it/they complied with all legal safety requirements.]. The expert's report showed that the [machinery OR working practices] conformed fully to those requirements. As a result of this report, the Respondent reasonably concluded that no further action

Related documents:

Popular documents