[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions >> Wallace & Anor v Tigi Ireland Ltd [2005] NIIT 2156_02 (22 March 2005) URL: http://www.bailii.org/nie/cases/NIIT/2005/2156_02.html Cite as: [2005] NIIT 2156_02, [2005] NIIT 2156_2

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

 


THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALS

CASE REFS: 2156/02

2357/02

CLAIMANTS: Kenneth Francis Wallace

Marian Wallace

RESPONDENT: Tigi Ireland Ltd

CASE REF: 2156/02

CLAIMANT: Tigi Ireland Ltd

RESPONDENT: Kenneth Francis Wallace

DECISION

The unanimous decision of the tribunal is that:-

The first claimant's claims for breach of contract, notice pay, breach of Working Time Regulations and wrongful dismissal are dismissed.

The second claimant's claims for unfair dismissal and breach of contract are dismissed.

The respondent's counterclaim is also dismissed.

Appearances:

The claimants did not appear nor were they represented.

The respondent was represented by Mr Logue.

1. The issues for the tribunal were:-

(a) Was the first claimant wrongfully dismissed, in breach of his contract, and is he entitled to notice pay and compensation for breach of the Working Time Regulations?

(b) Was the second claimant unfairly dismissed?

(c) Was the respondent entitled to counterclaim against the first claimant for the cost of a digital camera allegedly retained by him?

2. Neither claimant appeared nor was represented. No written representations were provided to the tribunal.
3. The respondent did not concede that either claimant was dismissed, and in the case of the second claimant the respondent did not concede that she was an employee.
4. The tribunal considered its powers under Regulation 11(3) of the Industrial Tribunals (Constitution & Rules of Procedure) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2004. The tribunal considered the originating application and the notice of appearance. The tribunal decided to dismiss the claimants' claims because the onus of providing the fact of dismissal, and the onus of proving that the second claimant was an employee of the respondent is on the claimants. In the absence of oral evidence from the claimants the tribunal could not reach a determination on those issues.
5. The respondent did not pursue the counterclaim. Accordingly, all claims are dismissed.

Chairman:

Date and place of hearing: 22 March 2005, Londonderry

Date decision recorded in register and issued to parties: