THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALS

CASE REF:  1359/08

CLAIMANT:			David Young

RESPONDENT:		Elemorton Ltd t/a Benedicts 

CERTIFICATE OF CORRECTION

1.	The decision issued on 18 September 2009 should have read as follows:

    Constitution of Tribunal:
    Chairman:            Ms W A Crooke
    Members:		 Ms F Graham
                                  Mr P Archer

        

Chairman:	______________________________

Date:		______________________________

THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALS

CASE REF:	1359/08

CLAIMANT:			David Young

RESPONDENT:		Elemorton Ltd t/a Benedicts

DECISION
The unanimous decision of the tribunal is that as the claimant is no longer an employee of the respondent there is no utility in determining what are the terms of employment between the parties.

Constitution of Tribunal:
Chairman (sitting alone):	Ms Crooke	
	
Appearances:
The claimant appeared in person and represented himself.
The respondent was represented by Ms Maura Heron of JG O’Hare & Co Solicitors.

Sources of Evidence

The claimant gave evidence on his own behalf.

The Claim and the Defence

The claimant’s claim was for a failure on the part of the respondent to provide written particulars of employment.  The respondent accepted that these had not been provided and attached to its response a form of particulars that should have been provided to the claimant at the outset of his employment.

The Relevant Law

The relevant law is found in Article 33 of the Employment Rights (Northern Ireland) Order 1996.  The tribunal also considered Article 27 of the Employment (Northern Ireland) Order 2003 and the case of Scott-Davies –v- Redgate Medical Services UKEAT/0273/06/LA.

The Facts

1.	The claimant does not have the right to bring a claim for unfair dismissal as he does not have the required period of one year’s service.

2.	There is no right to monetary compensation for the respondent’s admitted failure to provide written particulars as the right to written particulars is not a jurisdiction contained in Schedule 4 to the Employment (Northern Ireland) Order 2003.

3.	The claimant does not dispute that the particulars attached to the respondent’s response are what he should have received.

4.	The claimant is no longer an employee and as such, there is no utility in determining what the terms are between the parties pursuant to the authority of the case of Scott-Davies –v- Redgate Medical Services.

Conclusions

There is no further order that the tribunal can make in this case.  Consequently the claimant’s claim is hereby dismissed.

Chairman:

Date and place of hearing:	20 August 2009, Belfast.		

Date decision recorded in register and issued to parties: