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!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions >> Nikolova v Grafton Recruitment Limited [2015] NIIT 733_14IT (09 March 2015) URL: http://www.bailii.org/nie/cases/NIIT/2015/733_14IT.html Cite as: [2015] NIIT 733_14IT |
||
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALS
CASE REFS: 733/14
829/14
CLAIMANT: Hristina Nikolova
RESPONDENTS: 1. Grafton Recruitment Limited
2. Kerry Foods Enniskillen
DECISION
The unanimous decision of the tribunal is set out at Paragraphs 1. and 2. below.
Constitution of Tribunal:
Employment Judge: Employment Judge Buchanan
Members: Mrs D Adams
Mr I Rosbotham
Appearances:
The claimant was represented by Mr A Nikolov.
The first-named respondent was represented by Mr T Warnock, Barrister-at-Law, instructed by Pinsent Masons Belfast LLP, Solicitors.
The second-named respondent was represented by Ms K Moore, Solicitor, of Engineering Employers’ Federation Northern Ireland.
1(i) The claimant’s claim in respect of unlawful deductions from her wages was dismissed following its withdrawal on the first day of hearing.
(ii) All claims against the first-named respondent, Grafton Recruitment Ltd, were dismissed, following their withdrawal by the claimant on the third day of hearing.
(iii) All the claimant’s claims against the second-named respondent, Kerry Foods Enniskillen, were dismissed following a hearing on the merits.
2 The tribunal further ordered that the claimant pay to the second-named respondent, Kerry Foods Enniskillen, the sum of £500.00 in respect of costs incurred by it in defending these proceedings. The tribunal was satisfied that the claimant had, in bringing the proceedings, and her representative had, in conducting the proceedings, acted unreasonably, and that the bringing of the proceedings by her had been misconceived.
3 Reasons were given at the hearing.
Employment Judge
Date and place of hearing: 12 – 16 January 2015, Belfast
Date decision recorded in register and issued to parties:
