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 >> Balcetis v Balcetis (Discrimination - Disability) [2018] NIIT 02267_16IT (10 October 2018) URL: http://www.bailii.org/nie/cases/NIIT/2018/02267_16IT.html Cite as: [2018] NIIT 02267_16IT, [2018] NIIT 2267_16IT |
||
[New search] [Contents list] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALS
CASE REF: 2267/16
CLAIMANT: Aristidas Balcetis
RESPONDENTS: 1. Ulsterbus Limited
2. Independent Occupational Health Limited
3. Dr Frank O'Reilly
DECISION ON A PRE-HEARING REVIEW
The decision of the tribunal is set out in the body of the decision.
Constitution of Tribunal:
Employment Judge (sitting alone): Employment Judge Greene
Appearances:
The claimant was appeared in person.
The second and third respondents were represented by Mr Mark Mason.
The first respondent was neither represented nor in attendance.
The tribunal also had the benefit of an interpreter Mr Marijus Gineitis.
1. At a Case Management Discussion Employment Judge Drennan QC had directed that a Pre-Hearing Review would take place to consider the following issue:
"Whether the claimant's claims against the second and third-named respondents should be struck out, pursuant to Rule 18(7)(b) of the Rules of Procedure on the grounds that the claimant's claims against the said respondents and each of them are misconceived (ie, have no reasonable prospect of success)".
2. The Pre-Hearing Review came on for hearing on 21 September 2018 and
4 October 2018. The Pre-Hearing Review had regard to the evidence given by the claimant; documents agreed by both parties; and submissions.
3. Having considered the application on behalf of the second and third-named respondents I answered the Pre-Hearing Review in the affirmative. Accordingly, the claimant's claims against the second and third respondents are dismissed.
4. Full oral reasons for my decision were given at the hearing.
5. A further Case Management Discussion will take place, at a date to be arranged, to give such other directions and orders as may be necessary to bring this claim on for hearing.
Employment Judge:
Dates and place of hearing: 21 September 2018 and 4 October 2018, Belfast.
Date decision recorded in register and issued to parties:
