THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALS 

CASE REF:	806/03
882/03

CLAIMANTS:			Ernest Clark
					Graham Pickering

RESPONDENTS:		1.	Roy Gunning T/A Antrim Pine
2.	Department for Employment & Learning
3.	Peter White T/A Parklane Furniture

DECISION

The unanimous finding of the tribunal is that the first claimant is entitled to a redundancy payment of £1388.52 and the second claimant is entitled to a redundancy payment of £711.12.

Constitution of Tribunal:

Chairman:		Mr Greene
Members		Mr Orr
			Mr Lowden

Appearances:

The claimant was represented by Mr J McShane, Solicitor of P A Duffy & Co Solicitors.

The first named respondent was neither present nor represented.

The second named respondent was represented Ms K Dobbin and Mr P Curran of Department for Employment & Learning.

The third named respondent was neither present nor represented.

Source of Evidence

1.	The tribunal heard evidence from both claimants.  The tribunal also received the claimants’ applications to the National Insurance Fund, letters from the second respondent of 3 March 2003 and the third respondent of 28 September 2005, four bundles of documents and other correspondence.

The Claim and Defence

2.	The claimants claimed redundancy payments.  The first respondent did not enter a Notice of Appearance.  The second respondent could not make payments of redundancy to the claimants as neither the first nor the third respondent accepted liability for a redundancy payment.  The third respondent denied any liability for any redundancy payments.

The title of the third respondent was amended to Peter White t/a Parklane Furniture.

The Issues

3.	(a)	Are the claimants entitled to a redundancy payment?

Findings of Fact

4.	(a)	The first respondent employed the first claimant from 9 February 1998
to mid-September 2002.  The third respondent employed him from mid-September 2002 until his dismissal on 30 December 2002.

(b)	The first respondent employed the second claimant from 7 February 1999 to mid-September 2002.  The third respondent employed him from mid-September 2002 until his dismissal on 30 December 2002.

(c)	The first claimant was born on 14 June 1942.  He earned per week £231.42 gross and was employed at all material times as a joiner.

(d)	The second claimant was born on 23 March 1976.  He earned per week £237.04 gross and was employed at all material times as a sprayer.

(e)	The first respondent ceased trading in mid-September 2002 and was adjudicated bankrupt by the High Court on 6 October 2003.

(f)	The third respondent ceased trading on 30 December 2002 and dismissed all employees including the claimants.

(g)	A transfer of undertaking occurred between the first and third respondent in mid-September 2002.

(h)	The claimants were dismissed on 30 December 2002 because the third respondent ceased trading because of insufficient work, debts and lack of funds.

(i)	A redundancy situation existed at 30 December 2002.  Both claimants were dismissed by reason of redundancy and neither has received a redundancy payment.

The Law

5.	(a)	An employee dismissed by reason of redundancy is entitled to a 
redundancy payment Employment Rights (Northern Ireland) Order 1996 Article 170.

(b)	The quantum of the redundancy payment is calculated in accordance with the scheme set out in Article 197 of the Employment Rights (Northern Ireland) Order 1996.

Application of the Law and Findings and Fact to the Issues

6.	(a)	Both claimants are entitled to a redundancy payment.

(b)	The first claimant is entitled to a redundancy payment of £1388.52 (231.42 x 6).

(c)	The second claimant is entitled to a redundancy payment of £711.12 (237.04 x 3).

This is a relevant decision for the purposes of the Industrial Tribunals (Interest) Order (Northern Ireland) 1990.

Chairman:	

Date and place of hearing:	19 December 2003 and 30 September 2005, Belfast.

Date decision recorded in register and issued to parties: