British
and Irish Legal Information Institute
Freely Available British and Irish Public Legal Information
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions >> Kernohan v Galgorm Manor Hotel Ltd [2005] NIIT 5252_03 (29 September 2005)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/nie/cases/NIIT/2005/5252_03.html
Cite as: [2005] NIIT 5252_3, [2005] NIIT 5252_03
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
- These reasons are given in summary form.
- The applicant claimed unfair dismissal. The respondent did not accept the applicant's claim.
- The tribunal made the following finding:-
- The tribunal refuses the applicant's application for costs as the respondent succeeded in getting time extended for its Notice of Appearance and the case would not have been completed in one day.
- This is a relevant decision for the purposes of the Industrial Tribunals Interest Order (Northern Ireland) 1990.
CASE REF: 5252/03
APPLICANT: Elizabeth Kernohan
RESPONDENT: Galgorm Manor Hotel Limited
The unanimous decision of the tribunal is that the applicant was unfairly dismissed. It awards her compensation of £2128.38.
Appearances:
The applicant was represented by Ms Askin of Counsel, instructed by James O'Brien & Co, Solicitors
The respondent was represented by Mr P Smyth, its General Manager.
At the outset the tribunal extended time to the respondent to lodge its Notice of Appearance to 20 May 2004.
(a) The respondent employed the applicant as a housekeeper from 1 October 1995 to 15 August 2003. Her weekly wage was agreed at £103.20 gross and net. Her date of birth is 30 May 1959.
(b) On 4 August 2003 a row occurred on the respondent's premises involving two other staff members Catherine and Gwen in the presence of the applicant.
(c) The head housekeeper brought the two rowing parties to her office where the dispute was resolved.
(d) Subsequently the applicant met the head housekeeper, stated that she was fed up with the rowing, handed to her the master keys, stated that she was going home, and signed out at 10.30 am.
(e) The head housekeeper regarded the applicant's actions as lacking finality and manifesting pique.
(f) The applicant did not state that she was resigning or use unequivocal language that would have indicated that she was resigning.
(g) The applicant then made a claim for incapacity benefit and submitted a self-certifying sickness note and subsequently a sick certificate.
(h) The respondent wrote to the applicant on 15 August 2003 that amounted to a dismissal for misconduct.
(i) A dismissal for conduct can render a dismissal fair.
(j) For conduct to render a dismissal fair an employer must have a reasonable belief that the employee has committed an act of misconduct, having carried out a reasonable investigation and dismissal must be within the band of reasonable responses.
(k) On the evidence before the tribunal the respondent did not carry out a reasonable investigation, nor was the applicant made aware of any charge against her or given an opportunity to state her case.
(l) The respondent acted unreasonably in all the circumstances.
(m) The applicant was not afforded an appeal.
(n) The applicant's dismissal was therefore unfair.
(o) The applicant obtained other employment on 15 September 2003. She did not suffer any loss of earnings but was forced to get a taxi costing £11 per week.
(p) Accordingly the tribunal awards compensation as follows:-
Basic Award:
£103.20 x 8.5 = £ 877.20
Compensatory Award:
Loss of earnings from 15 August 2003 to 15 September 2003
£103.20 x 4.43 = £ 457.18
Taxi fares from 15 September 2003 to 29 September 2004
£11 x 54 = £ 594.00
Loss of statutory rights = £ 200.00
Total Compensation = £2128.38
Prescribed period is from 15 August 2003 to 15 September 2003
Prescribed element is £103.20 x 4.43 = £ 457.18
Chairman:
Date and place of hearing: 17 August 2004 and 29 September 2004, Belfast
Date decision recorded in register and issued to parties: