[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions >> Bankhead v The Directorate of Naval Reserves & Ors [2003] NIIT 1142_03 (20 October 2003) URL: http://www.bailii.org/nie/cases/NIIT/2003/1142_03.html Cite as: [2003] NIIT 1142_03, [2003] NIIT 1142_3

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

 


INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALS

CASE REF: 1142/03

APPLICANT: Maurice Bankhead

RESPONDENTS: 1. The Directorate of Naval Reserves

2. The Royal Navy

3. The Ministry of Defence

DECISION ON A PRELIMINARY ISSUE

The unanimous decision of the tribunal is that

1. The applicant's complaint of unfair dismissal is dismissed by virtue of the provisions of Articles 236 and 237 and Paragraph 12(1) of Schedule 2 of the Employment Rights (Northern Ireland) Order 1996.
2. The applicant's complaint of disability discrimination is dismissed by virtue of the provisions of Article 64(vii) of the Disability Discrimination (Northern Ireland) Act 1995.

Appearances:

The applicant did not attend and was not represented.

The respondents were represented by Mrs Murnaghan Barrister-at-Law instructed by Mona McRoberts of the Crown Solicitor's Office.

The case came before the tribunal to consider the following preliminary issues:-

3. "Whether the tribunal has jurisdiction to hear the applicant's complaint of unfair dismissal, having regard to the terms of Articles 236 and 237 and Paragraph 12(1) of Schedule II of the Employment Rights (Northern Ireland) Order 1996".

"Whether the tribunal has jurisdiction to hear the applicant's complaint of disability discrimination, having regard to the terms of Article 64(vii) of the Disability Discrimination (Northern Ireland) Act 1995".

"If it has jurisdiction, whether the applicant has a disability, within the meaning of Section 1 of the Disability Discrimination (Northern Ireland) Act 1995".

4. In the absence of the applicant, the contents of his originating application were considered by the tribunal. The applicant was a member of the Royal Naval Reserve from 5 March 1983 until 10 January 2003 and a full-time member from 2 November 1998 until 2 November 2001. The tribunal found that the applicant's status as a full-time member of the Royal Navy Reserve and as a member of the Naval Forces of the Crown precluded him from bringing a claim of unfair dismissal by virtue of the provisions of Articles 236 and 237 of the Employment Rights (Northern Ireland) Order 1996. The applicant's position as a member of the Naval Forces of the Crown was not disputed by him in his originating application.
5. In respect of the claim for disability discrimination the provisions of Section 64(vii) of the Disability Discrimination (Northern Ireland) Act 1995 preclude members of the naval, military or air-force from the provisions of Part II of the Act and therefore in the circumstances of this case prevent the applicant bringing a claim for disability discrimination.
6. In the absence of any contrary evidence from the applicant, the applications in respect of both unfair dismissal and disability discrimination are therefore dismissed by the tribunal.
7. In view of our findings above the tribunal made no decision on the question of whether the applicant had a disability within the meaning of Section 1 of the Disability Discrimination Act.
8. At the conclusion of the hearing, Mrs Murnaghan made an application for costs on behalf of the respondents. The tribunal considered the circumstances of the applicant including his absence from the jurisdiction and the nature of his application to the tribunal and decided that an award of costs was not appropriate in this case.

Chairman:

Date and place of hearing: 20 October 2003, Belfast.

Date decision recorded in register and issued to parties: