THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALS

CASE REFS:   1491/04
1426/04
436/04
1457/04

CLAIMANTS:		Tristan Neil Harper
		David Sheridan
		David Graham
		Ian Miles

RESPONDENTS:		1.	Image Investments Ltd
		2.	Blackbourne Electrical Co Ltd

Constitution of Tribunal:
Vice President (sitting alone):	Mrs M Price
DECISION ON A PRE-HEARING REVIEW

The decision of the tribunal is that the claims of Messrs Harper, Sheridan, Graham and Miles are not struck out for failure to comply with Orders.

Appearances:
The first, third and fourth-named claimants did not appear, nor were they represented.
The second-named claimant was represented by Mr McIntyre, Solicitor, of McAteer & Company, Solicitors.
The first-named respondent did not appear, nor was he represented, but correspondence was received.
The second-named respondent was represented by Mr G Grainger, Barrister-at-Law, instructed by O’Rorke McDonald & Tweed, Solicitors.

1.	The claim of David Sheridan is solely against Image Investments Ltd and it is not appropriate to strike out his claim for failure to comply because the Case Management Discussion Record of Proceedings dated 27 March 2006 and that Record of Proceedings on 4 January 2007 are not clear.  
2.	Progress in relation to the claims of David Sheridan and Tristan Neil Harper are likely to be resolved.  With agreement of Mr Grainger, Orders are made on behalf of the second-named respondent against the claimants.  The Orders are attached hereto and the claimants have 14 days to reply.
3.	Counsel for the second-named respondent stated that they were having difficulty in relation to obtaining information relating to the claimants’ employment records with the first-named respondent.  The Case Management Discussion Record of Proceedings dated 27 March 2006 in relation to a Case Management Discussion on 16 March 2006 made an Order in relation to the first-named respondent providing additional information to the second-named respondent.  That information was to be provided within 14 days from the date of record of these proceedings.  Counsel at this hearing stated that the information had not been provided but that is not the purpose of this pre-hearing review.  I am granting those Orders on behalf of the second-named respondent in relation to the cases of McFarland, Graham, Miller and Miles.  The first-named respondent has 14 days to comply with these Orders.
4.	In relation to the claimants, Graham and Miles, they are to provide the information as set out in the Orders to the second-named respondent within 14 days of today’s date.

Vice President:

Date and place of hearing:	13 February 2007, Belfast

Date decision recorded in register and issued to parties: