37
Siupa & Ors v Morrow (Striking Out) [2004] NIIT 5300_03 (14 May 2004)
BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you
consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it
will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free
access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
[New search]
[Printable RTF version]
[Help]
THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALS
CASE REFS: 5300/03
5301/03
5303/03
5305/03
APPLICANTS: Monika Siupa
Natalia Stawniak
Agnieszka Tawecka
Anna Talarczyk
RESPONDENT: David G Morrow
DECISION
The unanimous decision of the tribunal is that the applicants' complaints are not well-founded and the complaints are dismissed, without further order.
Appearances:
The applicants did not appear and were not represented.
The respondent was represented by Ms F Sterritt, Solicitor, of Higgins, Hollywood, Deazley, Solicitors.
- This decision is given in summary form.
THE ISSUE
- The matter was listed for hearing at 10.00 am on 14 May 2004, Notices of Hearing having been dispatched to the parties dated 1 March 2004. By 10.45 am on that date the applicants had not appeared nor were they represented, nor had any explanation been received for the applicants' non-appearance or representation, save as mentioned below. The tribunal then heard an application on behalf of the respondent that the applicants' respective originating applications should be struck out and dismissed by the tribunal. The tribunal accordingly considered the content of the applicants' respective originating applications and of the respondent's respective notices of appearance thereto, and the submissions on behalf of the respondent in support of the respondent's application.
THE TRIBUNAL'S DETERMINATION
- The tribunal noted that the Office of Tribunals had received an unsigned and undated handwritten note on 16 March 2004. That note purports to have been sent by or on behalf of all of the applicants and states that the applicants did not intend to proceed and had returned to their country of origin, Poland. Upon receipt of that the Office of Tribunals dispatched to the last known address of the applicants, documentation to enable them formally to withdraw their complaints, but this was not returned completed to the Office.
- After reviewing the documents before it and giving consideration to the submission on behalf of the respondent, the tribunal was of the view that the tribunal was properly entitled to have the applicants attend before the tribunal in order to make out and to substantiate their respective cases or, in addition to this or in the alternative, that such other appropriate evidence would be adduced by or on behalf of the applicants. That was, in the tribunal's opinion, essential in order to permit the tribunal to make due and proper enquiries and to satisfy itself as to essential matters of fact. Upon reviewing the applicants' respective originating applications and the respective notices of appearance thereto, the tribunal found that it was unable to make relevant and essential findings of fact such as might be necessary to draw conclusions that would support the view that the applicants' respective complaints were well-founded.
- For that reason, the tribunal finds that the applicants' respective complaints are not well-founded and the applicants' complaints are dismissed, without further Order.
Chairman:
Date and place of hearing: 14 May 2004, Belfast
Date decision recorded in register and issued to parties:
BAILII:
Copyright Policy |
Disclaimers |
Privacy Policy |
Feedback |
Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/nie/cases/NIIT/2004/37.html
