As long as you are happy that you can show you used the same selection criteria for his redundancy as for other people I would go ahead with his redundancy. ( e.g. if other people are being left go on a LIFO basis then do the same in his section)
You won't want him there anyway while a case is ongoing.
He sounds like a chancer who suddenly realises that his case (from 2005) is out of time and is claiming it happened in 2006. Maybe he got wind of the redundancies coming.
I would hardball this one.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?