Bell v Belfast Hilton [2003] NIIT 721_02 (21 January 2003)


BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?

No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!



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

Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions >> Bell v Belfast Hilton [2003] NIIT 721_02 (21 January 2003)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/nie/cases/NIIT/2003/721_02.html

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


     
    THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALS

    CASE REF: 721/02

    APPLICANT: David Alan Bell

    RESPONDENT: Belfast Hilton

    DECISION

    SUMMARY REASONS

    It is the unanimous decision of the Tribunal that it does not have jurisdiction to entertain the applicant's claim on the grounds of his lack of the qualifying period of service to mount a claim for unfair dismissal.

    The tribunal awards the sum of £100.00 to the respondent in respect of its costs. The applicant is ordered to pay this sum to the respondent.

    Appearances:

    The applicant did not appear and did not instruct any representation, so his Originating Application was considered pursuant to Rule 9(3) of the Industrial Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 1996.

    The respondent was represented by Mr H Webb, Barrister-at-Law.

    The tribunal found the following facts and in so doing had a book of documents prepared by the respondent before it.

  1. The applicant commenced employment with the respondent on 1 September 2001.

  2. The applicant was dismissed from employment by the respondent on 12 September 2001. As such the applicant has less than the necessary qualifying period of one year to bring a claim for unfair dismissal. Accordingly the tribunal does not have jurisdiction to hear his claim and it is hereby dismissed.

  3. On behalf of the respondent, Mr Webb applied for costs indicating that the respondent had been forced to have a witness brought from Scotland, to guard against the possibility that the case might actually run.

  6. In the light of recent case law which provides that if an applicant's conduct has been such as to register within the confines of Rule 12 of the Industrial Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 1996, then no considerations as to the means of the applicant to meet any award of costs, can fetter a tribunal in the award it makes. Accordingly, the tribunal awards the sum of £100.00 in respect of the respondent's costs, as it finds that the applicant's conduct in maintaining a claim for unfair dismissal, when it had been made clear to him by the tribunal that the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear such a claim, was clearly unreasonable.

    7. Chairman:

    Date and place of hearing: 21 January 2003, 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/2003/721_02.html