Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions

 


Thompson v Parnell & Anor (t/a Cutting Edge P.D) (Breach of Contract) [2002] NIIT 1693_01 (5 March 2002)

THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALS

CASE REF: 1693/01

2374/01

APPLICANT: Glenn Thompson

RESPONDENT: Paul Parnell and Deborah Parnell

T/a Cutting Edge P.D

DECISION

The unanimous decision of the tribunal is that the respondents pay to the applicant the sum of £2,224.12, which said sum was outstanding on the termination of the applicant's employment as a result of the respondents' breach of contract.

It is further ordered that a counterclaim against the applicant by the respondent be dismissed.

Appearances:

The applicant, Glenn Thompson, in person.

The respondent did not appear at the hearing.

1. These reasons are given in summary form.
2. (i) At the commencement of the proceedings the title of the respondents was amended to that now shown, with the consent of the applicant.

(ii) The respondents had entered an appearance, and had brought proceedings against the applicant by way of counterclaim for alleged overpayment of holiday pay and commission. They did not appear at the hearing and solicitors previously acting for them had come off record. The tribunal was satisfied that the respondents had received a notice of hearing. It did not consider it appropriate to adjourn the proceedings. In reaching its decision it has considered the contents of the notice of appearance, including details furnished relating to the respondents' counterclaim against the applicant.

(iii) The tribunal heard evidence from the applicant. It found him to be an honest witness. It had regard to documentary evidence produced by him. It finds the facts set out in the following paragraphs proved to its satisfaction on the balance of probabilities:

3. (i) The applicant was employed by the respondent as a sales representative from 3 September 2000 until 12 January 2001. He sold motor cycle accessories, and motor cycle clothing. On the latter date his employment was terminated by the respondents without notice. It appears from the correspondence that there had been a downturn in the respondents' business.

(ii) The applicant's gross wages were £165 per week, £155 net. He was also paid commission at the rate of 5% on sales of the respondents' products. The fact that he was paid commission is not in dispute, for in the respondents' counterclaim, they have sought to recover overpayments of commission.

4. The tribunal finds that on the termination of the applicant's employment with the respondents the following sums were due to him:

(i) Notice pay amounting to £310. He had agreed two weeks' notice with the respondents, by virtue of his contract of employment.

(ii) Unpaid holiday pay amounting to £155.

(iii) Unpaid wages for two weeks amounting to £310.

(iv) Outstanding commission on sales totalling £769.12.

(v) Outstanding expenses for the four months preceding the termination of his employment amounting to £1,510. These were expenses in respect of fuel/travelling and a mobile phone.

These amounts total £3,054.12, against which must be credited a sum of £830 received by the applicant. The amount outstanding is therefore £2,224.12.

5. The tribunal therefore orders that the respondents pay to the applicant the sum of £2,224.12, which sum was outstanding on the termination of the applicant's employment as a result of the respondents' breach of contract. The tribunal, having accepted the applicant's evidence, dismisses the counterclaim by the employer.
6. This is a relevant decision for the purposes of the Industrial Tribunals (Interest) Order (Northern Ireland) 1996.

____________________________________

Date and place of hearing: 13 February 2002, Belfast

Date decision recorded in register and issued to parties: 5 March 2002