444_06IT Ballesteros v Blue Recruitment Services Limi... [2008] NIIT 444_06IT (09 June 2008)

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

Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions >> Ballesteros v Blue Recruitment Services Limi... [2008] NIIT 444_06IT (09 June 2008)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/nie/cases/NIIT/2008/444_06IT.html
Cite as: [2008] NIIT 444_6IT, [2008] NIIT 444_06IT

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


     
    THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALS

    CASE REFS: 444/06

    445/06

    446/06

    447/06

    448/06

    449/06

    CLAIMANTS: 1. Bernadette Ballesteros

    2. Laarni Dg Cantalejo
    3. Aileen Endozo
    4. Berginia Cansicio
    5. Cora Garcia
    6. Elleda Tatlonghari

    RESPONDENT: Blue Recruitment Services Limited

    DECISION

    On the available evidence, the tribunal is not satisfied, to the requisite evidential standard, in relation to any of the relevant claims, that the particular claim is well founded. Accordingly, in the case of each claimant, all of the claimant's claims against the respondent must be dismissed.

    Constitution of Tribunal:

    Chairman: Mr P Buggy

    Members: Mr D Hampton

    Ms T Madden

    Appearances:

    None of the claimants were present or represented.

    The respondent was not present or represented.

    REASONS

  1. Rule 27(5) of the Industrial Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2005 ("the Rules") is in the following terms:-

    2. (5) If a party fails to attend or be represented for the purpose of conducting the party's case … at the time and place fixed for such hearing, the tribunal may dismiss or dispose of the proceedings in the absence of that party or may adjourn the hearing to a later date.

  2. The claimants in these proceedings are now living in the Philippines. Through the claimant Ms Cansicio, all the claimants have been in contact with the Office of the Industrial Tribunals, in an email which Ms Cansicio sent to the Office on 3 May 2008. In the course of that email, she made it clear that, at this hearing, none of the claimants would be present or represented, for cost-effectiveness and other pragmatic reasons.

  3. Against that background, we decided to proceed with the case in the absence of the claimants and in the absence of the respondent.

  4. In doing so, we took account of the documentation which is contained in the various case files. The main useful documentation in that connection was contained in the claim forms and in the responses.

  5. All six claim forms are practically identical. All six responses are practically identical.

  6. In essence, in each case, each claimant complains of the following:-

    7. (1) Breach of contract and unlawful deduction of wages in relation to salary payments.
    (2) Breach of the Working Time Regulations in relation to holidays, hours worked per week and rest breaks.

    (3) There is a claim for unpaid wages.

    (4) Each claim form also includes an assertion that the claimant has been subjected to racial discrimination.

    (5) Each claimant complains of (constructive) unfair dismissal.

  7. Originally there were two respondents to these proceedings. The other respondent was Boconnell Mushrooms, which has settled the various proceedings against them, on an agreed basis. Following that settlement, Boconnell Mushrooms was released from the proceedings.

  8. In determining these claims, we have necessarily had to have regard to where the burden of proof lies.

  9. In each response, the sole remaining respondent to these proceedings denies the factual accuracy of the statements contained in the relevant claim form, denies that it is liable in respect of any of the claims made against it and denies that it was ever the employer of the relevant claimant.

  10. Against that background, we have decided that each claim must be dismissed, because, in each instance, the claimant has not, in the circumstances of this case, been able to prove her claim to the requisite standard.

  11. In view of comments made in the course of the various claim forms and, indeed in view of comments made in the course of the responses filed in these proceedings by Blue Recruitment Services Ltd, we are left with a sense of unease about the practices of that company. However, we have no freestanding powers of inquiry. Instead, we have to adjudicate upon the claims which are actually before us; and in adjudicating upon those claims, we must comply with the rules of evidence.

    12. Chairman:

    Date and place of hearing: 2 June 2008 at Belfast.

    Date decision recorded in register and issued to parties:

BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/nie/cases/NIIT/2008/444_06IT.html