Fair Employment Tribunal Northern Ireland Decisions

 
FAIR EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL

CASE REF: 366/02FET

1950/02

APPLICANT: Maria Del Pilar C Lorenzo

RESPONDENT: F G Wilson (Engineering) Ltd

DECISION

The unanimous decision of the Tribunal is to dismiss both applications.

Appearances:

The applicant did not appear and was not represented before the Tribunal.

The respondent was represented by Ms L Toolan of the Engineering Employers Federation.

1. This hearing was listed on 4 August 2004 for hearing on 4 November on four preliminary issues – see statement attached and marked "A". Notice of Hearing was issued to the applicant's representative but by letter dated 10 August those representatives advised that –

   (a) they were no longer acting for the applicant, and

   (b) correspondence should therefore be sent to her at –

   Paseo Parra No1

   3F Aguilas

   Murcia

   Spain.

   By letter dated 18 August 2004, notice of hearing was redirected to that address. This correspondence has not been returned and the applicant has made no contact with her former solicitors, the respondent or the Office of the Tribunals.

2. The applicant's complaint against the respondent is –

   (a) unfair dismissal;

   (b) religious belief/political opinion discrimination;

   (c) breach of contract; and

   (d) unlawful deductions from wages.

   It is for the applicant to show that in respect of unfair dismissal and unlawful deductions from wages – Parts XI and IV of the Employment Rights (NI) Order 1996 – she did not work ordinarily outside of Northern Ireland – see Article 239 of the said Order. In her application form, the applicant asserts that she worked in Spain. In relation to a complaint under the Fair Employment & Treatment Order (NI) 1998 the applicant likewise must establish that she did her work wholly or mainly inside Northern Ireland.

3. In relation to the applicant's complaint of breach of contract, it is for the applicant to show that she was an employee of the respondent such being denied by the respondent.

4. Accordingly in respect of all claims the applicant has failed to establish an essential ingredient even after taking into account her originating application. In these circumstances, complaints 366/02FET and 1950/02 are dismissed.

5. The respondent sought costs because of the manner in which proceedings were conducted by the applicant. Substantial costs had to be incurred including consultation with Spanish lawyers who represented the respondent in similar claims by the applicant in Spain. The applicant has not sought to communicate leaving the respondent with the need to be prepared for all eventualities. She sought costs of £1,250 which we believe is an appropriate figure. We order the applicant to pay to the respondent the sum of £1,250 because we believe that she has acted unreasonably in conducting these proceedings.

   ______________________________________

   J E MAGUIRE

   President

   Date and place of hearing: 4 November 2004, Belfast

   Date decision recorded in register and issued to parties: