[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions >> Kelly v McMillan & Anor (Interim Order) [2002] NIIT 3887_01 (5 August 02) URL: http://www.bailii.org/nie/cases/NIIT/2002/92a.html Cite as: [2002] NIIT 3887_01, [2002] NIIT 3887_1

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

 


Kelly v McMillan & Anor (Interim Order) [2002] NIIT 3887_01 (5 August 02)

THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALS

CASE REF: 3887/01

APPLICANT: Harry

RESPONDENTS: Robert McMillan

Paul McCartney

DECISION

The unanimous decision of the tribunal is

(i) that the second named respondent shall be dismissed from the proceedings with the consent of the applicant; and

(ii) that the case shall be postponed to allow the applicant to comply fully with the orders for further and better particulars outstanding and to allow the respondent to make requests for further information, such request to be made within 21 days of the date of this order.

Appearances:

The applicant was represented by Mr Kiddle of UCATT.

The respondents were represented by Mr McGahon of ELC Group Ltd.

1. The respondent applied for a postponement of the case on the basis that its representative had only been instructed within the last 10 days and needed to seek further information from the other side. The respondent 's representative had sent a letter to the Tribunal setting out the matters which it wanted to draw to the Tribunal's attention by way of preliminary issues. These were as follows:
2. (a) the respondents contended that only the first named respondent had been the applicant's employer and asked for the second named respondent to be removed from the proceedings. The applicant's representative consented to this and the Tribunal orders that the second-named respondent be dismissed from the proceedings;

(b) and

(c) The respondent alleged that the applicant's complaint arose from incidents in January 1999 when the respondent said the applicant was a self-employed contractor and not employed by him. Further, as the claim was not lodged until December 2001 the respondent alleged that the claim was out of time. The Tribunal takes the view that these are matters on which evidence should be heard and a view formed by the Tribunal hearing the substantive case and accordingly declines to make any finding.

(d) The respondent's representative pointed out that orders for further and better particulars and discovery had been obtained by the respondent against the applicant but that replies were incomplete and that they wished to raise some further requests for information. As the respondent had changed representatives just a short time before there had been little time to request the information. The Tribunal therefore directs that the applicant should comply fully with the orders made against him and that the respondent should raise such further requests for information as it wishes to make within 21 days of the date of this order and orders that the matter shall be postponed until a date to be fixed. The parties are to notify the Tribunal Office once the exchange of information has been completed so as to facilitate the relisting of the case.

____________________________________

Date and place of hearing: 5 August 2002, Belfast

Date decision recorded in register and issued to parties: