[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions >> Samaana v Mater Hospital Trust [2007] NIIT 726_06 (12 October 2007) URL: http://www.bailii.org/nie/cases/NIIT/2007/726_06.html Cite as: [2007] NIIT 726_6, [2007] NIIT 726_06

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

 
THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALS

CASE REF: 726/06

CLAIMANT: Mohammed Samaana

RESPONDENT: Mater Hospital Trust

DECISION ON A PRE-HEARING REVIEW

The decision of the tribunal is that the respondent's application to strike-out the claimant's claim under Rule 18(7)(e) of the Industrial Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2005 on the grounds that the claimant had failed to comply with an Order for Additional Information and an Order for Discovery, both dated 3 April 2007, is refused.

Constitution of Tribunal:

Chairman (sitting alone): Mr N Drennan QC

Appearances:

The claimant appeared in person and was unrepresented.

The respondent was represented by Ms S Owens, Solicitor, of MSC Daly, Solicitors.

Reasons

1. This hearing was arranged to consider the respondent's application to strike-out the claimant's claim under Rule 18(7)(e) of the Industrial Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2005 on the grounds the claimant had failed to comply with an Order for Additional Information and an Order for Discovery, both dated 3 April 2007.
2. Ms Owens fairly and frankly acknowledged that the claimant had provided discovery to the respondent on 3 October 2007, pursuant to the said Order for Discovery dated 3 April 2007. In addition, he had provided additional information on 8 October 2007, pursuant to the Order for Additional Information, dated 3 April 2007. The claimant informed me that he had no other relevant documents to discover to the respondent, other than the documents sent to the respondent's solicitor on 3 October 2007. In relation to the replies to the Order for Additional Information, Ms Owens indicated that, arising out of the said replies, it would be necessary for the respondent to seek further additional information from the claimant.

It was agreed, and I so ordered, that the respondent would serve on the claimant a further Notice for Additional Information on or before 26 October 2007 and that the claimant would reply to the said Notice within 14 days of receipt of the said Notice. If any further Orders are required from the tribunal, then they should be sought promptly in accordance with the relevant Rules of Procedure.

3. In view of the fact that the claimant has now replied to the Orders for Additional Information and Discovery, both dated 3 April 2007, I consider that a fair trial is still possible. In those circumstances, I do not consider that it would be appropriate for the tribunal to strike-out the claimant's claim, pursuant to Rule 18(7)(e) of the Industrial Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2005. However, I make it clear to the claimant that, although I have refused to strike-out the claimant's claim in the above circumstances, it is essential that he reply to the further Notice for Additional Information to be served by the respondent on him, as set out above. If he does not he may be faced again with a strike-out application by the respondent.
4. In light of the foregoing, it was agreed that a further Case Management Discussion will be held in this matter during the period December 2007 – January 2008. The purpose of that Case Management Discussion will be to:-

(a) identify the precise issues which the tribunal has to consider;

(b) consider the use of witness statements and their exchange;

(c) dispose of any outstanding pre-trial issues between the parties; and

(d) agree dates for hearing.

I reminded the claimant that these matters had been the purpose of the Case Management Discussion which had been held on 24 January 2007; but which had not been able to be dealt with, for the reasons set out in the Record of Proceedings dated 30 January 2007 and the subsequent failure to comply with the tribunal's Orders. I emphasised to the claimant the importance of replying to the above Notice; and that the said failures that had taken place in the last 12 months had resulted in the delay to the tribunal listing this matter. I indicated that I hoped that such failures were now a thing of the past. The claimant informed me that he had consulted solicitors in recent months. If any solicitors are to come on record for the claimant, then the tribunal should be informed.

Chairman:

Date and place of hearing: 12 October 2007, Belfast

Date decision recorded in register and issued to parties: