Freely Available British and Irish Public Legal Information
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
Fair Employment Tribunal Northern Ireland Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Fair Employment Tribunal Northern Ireland Decisions >> McCue v 1British Geological Survey & Ors [2002] NIFET 443_97 (27 August 2002)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/nie/cases/NIFET/2002/443_97.html
Cite as: [2002] NIFET 443_97
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
- The applicant complained of discrimination contrary to the Fair Employment Act 1976 when he was not selected for interview in 1997 for a post with the British Geological Survey, part of the Natural Environment Research Council. Each of the respondents denied discrimination.
- This matters was listed on 29 July 2002 for hearing on 27 August 2002. At a previous hearing on 1 March 2002, which had to be adjourned because Mr McCue's father was very ill, I granted orders for particulars to the first and third respondents and allowed 21 days for a response. I directed also that the applicant should copy those replies to the second respondent. I refused to issue witness requirements to some 140 persons as requested by the applicant. Mr McCue replied to the orders to the representative of the first and third respondents on 22 March. He did not reply to the representative of the second respondent who applied for his claim against them to be struck out. Mr McCue was told on 31 July that this application to strike out his complaint would be considered at the outset of the hearing on 27 August when he would be able to show cause as to
- In the replies supplied, the applicant requested that a copy of the replies should not be sent to the second respondent's representative 'as there is a real danger of perverting the course of justice in an extreme criminal matter, ie. they will alert the criminals involved either unintentionally or otherwise. They are well aware of the connections at Balloo in August 1981 and their connections to the discrimination in this case'.
- At the conclusion of the second respondent's submission, the Tribunal invited Mr McCue to show cause why his application should not be dismissed. Mr McCue refused to address the issues but began to make a long and rambling series of allegations, including allegations relating to murder, conspiracies, assaults, forgeries, abductions. Mr McCue was abusive to the Tribunal and refused to give way on interjection by the Chairman. He was invited to present relevant submissions and warned on a number of occasions that failure to do so would lead to the dismissal of his complaint. Mr McCue continued with his abusive address delivered in a threatening manner and the Chairman adjourned the proceedings.
- Having considered the events which had happened, the Tribunal unanimously agreed that they would not continue the hearing without a police presence. When PSNI officers arrived, they invited Mr McCue to return to the tribunal room and give assurances that he would accept the directions of the Tribunal and behave in a peaceful and orderly manner. Mr McCue declined to do so stating that 'he wouldn't give assurances about anyone's safety if he returned to the hearing room particularly if [the President] was present'.
- No judicial body can undertake its duties if those who seek its assistance refuse to accept directions, produce relevant evidence and submissions, and to behave in a non-threatening manner. Mr McCue has been given every opportunity to present his case but has indicated that he has reservations about undertaking not to harm those involved in the proceedings. He has refused to return to prosecute his proceedings. The Tribunal sent notice to him whilst he was present in the tribunal premises but he declined to attend. We do not intend to refer to the history of this matter but
CASE REF: 00443/97FET
APPLICANT: James McCue
RESPONDENTS: 1. British Geological Survey
2. Queen's University of Belfast
3. Natural Environment Research Council
The unanimous decision of the Tribunal is that this application is dismissed against all respondents.
APPEARANCES:
APPLICANT: Mr McCue appeared without representation.
RESPONDENT: Mr F O'Donaghue, QC, for the first and third respondents, instructed by Tovell & Co, London and Morrow & Wells, Belfast. Mr A Brett, L'Estrange & Brett for the second respondent.
why his complaint should not be struck out. He was told also that a relevant consideration then would be whether he had at this stage complied with the order. Earlier on 22 March 2002 the applicant, Mr McCue, had asked whether he was required to copy these particulars to the representative of the second respondent. He said that he was reluctant to do so and asked that the following be recorded -
"I refuse to do so because to do so may constitute perverting the course of justice at this stage and I am seeking advice from PSNI."
The order was not complied with at the start of the hearing and the second respondent sought the dismissal of the complaint made against them.
unanimously dismiss this application. His conduct places him in serious contempt of the Tribunal and its processes.
____________________________________
J E MAGUIRE
President
Date and place of hearing: 27 August 2002, Belfast
Date decision recorded in register and issued to parties: