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 >> Murray v Firecrest Compartmentation Ltd Firecrest (NI) Ltd Department for Employment and ... [2011] NIIT 02789_10IT (07 October 2011) URL: http://www.bailii.org/nie/cases/NIIT/2011/02789_10IT.html Cite as: [2011] NIIT 02789_10IT, [2011] NIIT 2789_10IT |
||
[New search] [Help]
THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALS
CASE REFS: 2789/10
280/11
595/11
CLAIMANT: Edward Patrick Murray
RESPONDENTS: 1. Firecrest Compartmentation Ltd
2. Firecrest (NI) Ltd
3. Department for Employment and Learning
DECISION
(A) The claimant’s redundancy payment claim against Firecrest Compartmentation Ltd is not well-founded and accordingly it is dismissed.
(B) I am satisfied that the claimant is entitled to a redundancy payment of £2,220 from Firecrest (NI) Ltd.
(C) Pursuant to Article 205 of the Employment Rights (Northern Ireland) Order 1996 (“the 1996 Order”), I have decided that Firecrest (NI) Ltd became liable to make a redundancy payment of the above amount to the claimant in October 2010.
Constitution of Tribunal:
Chairman (sitting alone): Mr P Buggy
Appearances:
The claimant appeared in person.
1. Firecrest Compartmentation Ltd was not entitled to participate in the proceedings, because it had not presented a response.
2. Firecrest (NI) Ltd was not represented at this hearing.
3. The Department for Employment and Learning (“the Department”) was represented by Mr P Curran.
REASONS
1. At the end of the hearing, I issued my decision orally. At the same time, I gave reasons orally in respect of that decision. Accordingly, what follows is by way of summary only.
2. The claimant confirmed that the facts as stated in the Morgan/Martin cases (Case Ref: 2769/10 and Others) were, to the best of his knowledge, true.
3. I was satisfied that a “TUPE” transfer had occurred, during the Autumn of 2011, in respect of the entity to which the claimant was assigned at the time of that transfer.
4. The claimant’s redundancy payment entitlement is calculated on the basis of £370, multiplied by 6.
5. This hearing, and this Decision, addressed only the following:-
(1) The claimant’s claim against the employer in respect of a redundancy payment.
(2) The claimant’s appeal against the Department’s refusal to make a payment to the claimant in respect of redundancy.
6. The claimant’s other claims will be addressed in a future hearing.
7. This is a relevant decision for the purposes of the Industrial Tribunals (Interest) Order (Northern Ireland) 1990.
Chairman:
Date and place of hearing: 3 October 2011, Belfast.
Date decision recorded in register and issued to parties:
