[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions >> Taylor v Knapp & Anor [2004] NIIT 9089_03 (19 February 2004) URL: http://www.bailii.org/nie/cases/NIIT/2004/9089_03.html Cite as: [2004] NIIT 9089_03, [2004] NIIT 9089_3

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

 
THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALS

CASE REF: 9089/03

APPLICANT: Julie-Ann Taylor

RESPONDENTS: 1. Martha Knapp

2. Marine Court Holdings Ltd

DECISION

The unanimous decision of the tribunal is that the tribunal does not have jurisdiction to entertain the applicant's claim in respect of unfair dismissal as she does not have sufficient service to make such a claim under Article 140 of the Employment Rights (Northern Ireland) Order 1996.

APPEARANCES:

APPLICANT: The applicant did not appear and did not instruct any representation. Therefore her originating application was considered by the tribunal pursuant to Rule 9(3) of the Industrial Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations (NI) 1996.

RESPONDENTS: Joanne White of Jones and Cassidy, Solicitors.

The tribunal found the following facts:-

1. The applicant was employed by the respondent from in or around 15 April 2003 to in or around 6 October 2003.
2. This was not her first period of employment with the respondent.
3. The applicant had a history with the respondent of failing to attend for work and failing to explain her absences.
4. When the applicant was re-employed, the respondent made it plain that the disciplinary matters for which she had previously been disciplined in her prior period of employment with the respondent were not to occur again.
5. The applicant failed to report for work on Sunday 5 and Monday 6 October 2003. The applicant wrote a note on 6 October 2003 to her employer which was not before the tribunal as it had been 'discarded' by the applicant's line manager, Mrs Patricia Vance.
6. The respondent simply dismissed the applicant without holding a disciplinary hearing. The respondent's disciplinary procedures were not before the tribunal but the respondent's General Manager, Mrs Knapp, confirmed that there was provision within them for the holding of a disciplinary hearing. She said in evidence that she did not consider it to be necessary.
7. In view of the applicant's short period of service, the tribunal has no jurisdiction to consider her claim in respect of her unfair dismissal. She does not have the qualifying period of employment to make such a claim.
8. The tribunal was extremely concerned at the poor industrial practice operated by the respondent company. The tribunal has noted that this respondent acted in breach of its own disciplinary rules and procedures.

Chairman: ____________________________________

Date and place of hearing: 19 February 2004, Belfast.

Date decision recorded in register and issued to parties: