Simpson & Ors v Lyle & Ors [2004] NIIT 2119_02 (5 August 2004)

BAILII [Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions >> Simpson & Ors v Lyle & Ors [2004] NIIT 2119_02 (5 August 2004)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/nie/cases/NIIT/2004/2119_02.html
Cite as: [2004] NIIT 2119_02, [2004] NIIT 2119_2

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


     
    THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALS

    CASE REF: 2119/02 & Others

    (See attached list)

    APPLICANTS: Simpson & Others

    (See attached list)

    RESPONDENTS: 1. Samuel Lyle

    2. Sandel Building Co Ltd (in liquidation)
    3. Department of Employment & Learning

    DECISION

    The unanimous decision of the tribunal is that the applications be dismissed.

    Appearances:

    The applicants did not attend and were not represented.

    The first and second respondents did not appear and were not represented.

    The third respondent was represented by Ms P Baird and Ms S Lennox of Redundancy Payments Service.

    Summary Reasons

  1. Although there was no appearance by or on behalf of the applicants a letter and submission dated 15 July 2004 had been sent in by their representative. That letter indicated that the applicants claims for redundancy payments, notice pay and outstanding wages had all been met and that the only outstanding issues were those of unfair dismissal and holiday pay.

  2. The tribunal was satisfied, on the basis of the papers, that the applicants were dismissed by reason of redundancy, as, indeed, the applicants themselves indicated both in their forms of application and by their acceptance of their redundancy payments from the third respondent.

    3. Redundancy is one of the reasons mentioned in Article 130(2) in relation to the fairness or unfairness of the dismissal. The fact that all employees were dismissed at the same time indicates to the tribunal that it was reasonable to treat it as a sufficient reason for dismissal in each case. No further question of unfair dismissal arises.

  3. As regards the applicants' claim for holiday pay there was insufficient evidence to enable the tribunal to determine what the arrangements about holiday pay were, how many days each applicant was entitled to, or how many days each applicant had actually taken. Consequently no determination of the amount, if any, to which an applicant might be entitled could be made and the applications fail.

    4. The tribunal noted, in passing, that the legislation refers to the Department making payments in respect of holiday pay "to which the employee had become entitled during the twelve months ending with the appropriate date". The "appropriate date" is the date of liquidation of the company, which in this case was apparently 16 May 2003. The qualifying period therefore commenced on 17 May 2002. Holiday pay rights are related to periods worked. It would seem that, in this case, the applicants' rights to holiday pay, if any, can only have accrued between 17 May 2002 (the commencement of the relevant period) and 26 August 2002 when the dismissals took place, a period of some three and a half months. It may be that the holiday rights accrued during that period may have been satisfied by the July holidays which would appear, according to the applicants' representative's letter of 13 July 2004, to have been taken by the applicants.

    Chairman:

    Date and place of hearing: 5 August 2004, Belfast.

    Date decision recorded in register and issued to parties:

    Case to be known as:

    RE: Simpson & Others –v- 1. Samuel Lyle

    2. Sandel Building Co Ltd (in liquidation)

    3. Department of Employment & Learning

    CASE REF NOS: 2119/02 & Others

    APPLICANT CRN RESPONDENT REPRESENTATIVE

  4. Mr Harold Simpson 2119/02 1. Samuel Lyle Eamon O'Neill 2. Sandel Building Co Ltd

    5. (in liquidation)

  5. Department of Employment

    6. & Learning

  6. Mr David Dallas 2120/02 1. Sandel Building Co Ltd Eamon O'Neill

    7. (in liquidation)

  7. Department of Employment

    8. & Learning

  8. Mr Derek Espie 115/03 1. Sandel Building Co Ltd Eamon O'Neill

    9. (in liquidation)

  9. Department of Employment

    10. & Learning

  10. Mr Jeremy Robinson 295/03 1. Sandel Building Co Ltd Eamon O'Neill

    11. (in liquidation)

  11. Department of Employment

    12. & Learning

  12. Mr Kieran O'Neill 236/03 1. Samuel Lyle Eamon O'Neill

  13. Department of Employment

    14. & Learning

  14. Mr Peter John Murray 237/03 1. Samuel Lyle Eamon O'Neill

  15. Department of Employment

    16. & Learning

  16. Mr Thomas James Laird 260/03 1. Samuel Lyle Eamon O'Neill

    17. Simpson 2. Department of Employment

    & Learning

    APPLICANT CRN RESPONDENT REPRESENTATIVE

  17. Mr Thomas William 310/02 1. Sandel Building Co Ltd Gerry Hagan

    18. Hutchinson (in liquidation)

    2. Department of Employment

    & Learning

  18. Harold Alexander 433/03 1. Samuel Lyle Gerry Hagan

    19. Benson 2. Department of Employment

    & Learning

BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/nie/cases/NIIT/2004/2119_02.html