Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions

You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions >> Lucas v Fisher Metal Group Limited (in... [2010] NIIT 198_10IT (11 November 2010)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/nie/cases/NIIT/2010/198_10IT.html
Cite as: [2010] NIIT 198_10IT

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALS

CASE REF: 198/10

CLAIMANT: Trevor Stanley Lucas

RESPONDENT: 1. Fisher Metal Group Limited (in administrative

receivership)

2. Fisher Metal Engineering LLP (formerly known as

WR Fisher LLP)

DECISION

(A) The claimant’s redundancy pay claim against Fisher Metal Group Limited (“the old employer”) is not well-founded and it is dismissed.

(B) The claimant’s redundancy payment claim against Fisher Metal Engineering LLP (“the new employer”) is well-founded and it is declared that the new employer is obliged to pay to the claimant a redundancy payment of £5,250.

Constitution of Tribunal:

Chairman: Mr Buggy

Members: Mr N Wright

Dr D Mercer

Appearances:

The claimant was not present or represented.

There was no appearance on behalf of either of the employers. The Department was represented by Mr P McAteer, Barrister-at-Law, instructed by the Departmental Solicitor’s Office.

REASONS

1. At the end of the hearing, we issued our decision orally. At the same time we gave oral reasons for our decision. Accordingly, what follows is by way of summary only.

2. Although the claimant was not present or represented, he did make written representations, in the form of a letter dated 14 October 2010, which he sent to the Secretary of the tribunals. In arriving at this decision, we took account of what was contained in the 14 October 2010 letter, and in its enclosures. In the same connection, we took account of what is asserted in the response which was presented in these proceedings on behalf of the new employer.

3. In the letter of 14 October 2010, the claimant asserts that he was entitled to notice pay and to holiday pay, which are still due to him. However, the claim form in these proceedings only makes a claim in respect of a redundancy payment. Accordingly, this Decision has been made only in respect of that redundancy payment claim.

4. The old employer has never been represented in relation to these proceedings. The new employer was initially represented by Russells Solicitors (of Great Victoria Street, Belfast), but ultimately ceased to be represented by anybody in these proceedings.

5. We are satisfied that the claimant was employed at a business at 1 Hallstown Road, Ballinderry Upper, Co Antrim, from 1 January 1999 until 15 July 2009; that he was then made redundant by the new employer; that when he was first employed in that business, he was employed there by the old employer; that he continued to be employed by that old employer there until the relevant entity was the subject of a TUPE transfer, in May 2009; and that he was thereafter employed there by the new employer. We are also satisfied that the claimant was born in October 1955.

6. Both the claimant and the Department are agreed that there was a TUPE transfer of the business in which the claimant was employed; whereby the relevant entity (an entity to which the claimant was assigned in the summer of 2009) had been transferred to the new employer. We are satisfied that those contentions are correct. We are satisfied that, in the summer of 2009, the new employer started to pay the claimant’s wages and that the old employer ceased to pay his wages. We are satisfied, that beforehand and afterwards, the claimant was carrying out the same work, at the same premises, and under the same immediate supervision; and that, both beforehand and afterwards, he was producing outputs which were relevant in the context of services which were being provided in respect of the same circle of customers.

7. This is a Decision which may result in a payment out of the National Insurance Fund (if the new employer does not pay the redundancy payment which we have decided is due to the claimant). Accordingly, the Department was entitled under the Industrial Tribunals Rules of Procedure to participate in the main hearing to the same extent as it would have been entitled to participate if it had been a party to these proceedings. That was the basis upon which the Department participated, at the main hearing, in these proceedings.

8. This is a relevant decision for the purposes of the Industrial Tribunals (Interest) Order (Northern Ireland) 1990.

Chairman:

Date and place of hearing: 21 October 2010, Belfast.

Date decision recorded in register and issued to parties:

About BAILII - FAQ - Copyright Policy - Disclaimers - Privacy Policy amended on 25/11/2010