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!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions >> McCullough v Lee Lavelle Paul Johnston Belfast City Sight Seeing Ltd Department for Employment and ... [2011] NIIT 00497_10IT (01 November 2011) URL: http://www.bailii.org/nie/cases/NIIT/2011/00497_10IT.html Cite as: [2011] NIIT 00497_10IT, [2011] NIIT 497_10IT |
||
[New search] [Help]
THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALS
CASE REF: 497/10
CLAIMANT: Ciaran McCullough
RESPONDENTS: 1. Lee Lavelle
2. Paul Johnston
3. Belfast City Sight Seeing Ltd
4. Department for Employment and Learning
DECISION
The proceedings are dismissed.
Constitution of Tribunal:
Chairman (sitting alone): Mr P Buggy
Appearances:
The claimant was not present or represented.
1. Lee Lavelle was debarred from participating in the proceedings because he had not presented response.
2. Paul Johnston was not present or represented.
3. Belfast City Sight Seeing Ltd was not represented.
4. The Department was represented by Mr Peter Curran.
REASONS
1. In these proceedings, the claimant makes claims against all of the respondents, apart from the Department, in respect of wages, holiday pay, notice pay and redundancy pay.
2. In these proceedings, the claimant also appeals against decisions made by the Department (as a response to statutory applications which he made to the Department) in its role as the statutory guarantor in respect of certain employment debts.
3. The claimant was not present or represented at this main hearing. In those circumstances, rule 27(5) of the Industrial Tribunals Rules provides that I have the discretion to dismiss or dispose of the proceedings in the absence of the claimant, or to adjourn the hearing to a later date.
4. No reason was provided for the claimant’s absence. I know of no good reason for that absence. I took account of such information as was in my possession in respect of this claim.
5. This claim is part of a group of claims. In that group, all of the employees make claims for employment debts arising out of their alleged employment with Belfast City Sight Seeing. As a result of Case Management Discussions which were held in relation to this group litigation, I am aware that, for lengthy periods, many employees of Belfast City Sight Seeing were paid in cash. For that reason, I consider that the sworn oral testimony of the claimant, in relation to any case within this group, is likely to be of particular importance.
6. Against the background outlined above, and for the reasons set out above, I decided not to adjourn the hearing, and I decided to dismiss these proceedings pursuant to the powers conferred by rule 27(5).
Chairman:
Date and place of hearing: 19 October 2011, Belfast.
Date decision recorded in register and issued to parties:
