THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALS       

CASE REF:    2771/11  

CLAIMANT:	Stephen James Maxwell Robinson

RESPONDENT:	NI Security Solutions

DECISION

The proceedings are dismissed.

Constitution of Tribunal:

Chairman:	Mr P Buggy

Members:	Mr B McGuire
	Mr B Hanna

Appearances:

The claimant was not present or represented.

The respondent had not presented any response and accordingly was not entitled to participate in this hearing.

REASONS

1.	It appears that, in July 2011, the claimant was made redundant by the respondent, but was not paid any redundancy money or holiday pay.  In these proceedings, the claimant makes claims in relation to those matters.

2.	This case originally came on for hearing on 13 March 2012.  However, the claimant was not present or represented on that date.  On 13 March 2012, the claimant was in touch with the Office of the Industrial Tribunals by telephone.  He said that his car had broken down on the day before and that he could not make it to Killymeal House for the hearing.  He was told to confirm his request for postponement (of the main hearing) in writing.  He never did so.

3.	The claimant was not present or represented at this (11 April) hearing.

4.	Rule 27(5) of the industrial tribunals rules (“the Rules”) provides as follows:

		“If a party fails to attend or to be represented (for the purpose of conducting the party’s case at the hearing under rule 26) 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.”

5.	Accordingly, rule 27(5) provides the tribunal with a list of options.  First, the tribunal may dismiss the proceedings.  Secondly, the tribunal may dispose of the proceedings in the absence of the claimant.  Thirdly, the tribunal may adjourn the hearing to a later date.

6.	Against the background outlined above, we do not consider that this as an appropriate case in which to adjourn the hearing.

7.	We have decided to dismiss the proceedings.

8.	We are not aware of any reason, let alone any good reason, for the non-attendance of the claimant at this (11 April) hearing.  No doubt, if the claimant does have a good reason for his non-attendance at the 11 April hearing, he will apply for a review of this decision, within the time limit which has been stipulated in the Rules in respect of any such review.  (It is noted that any such application for review must be made in writing, and must include details of the grounds of the application.)

9.	In deciding to dismiss the proceedings, the tribunal took due account of the information in its possession, which had been made available to it by the claimant.

Chairman:

Date and place of hearing:       11 April 2012, Belfast.

Date decision recorded in register and issued to parties: