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 >> Stewart v Treehouse Kindergarden Ltd [2013] NIIT 01638_12IT (11 January 2013)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/nie/cases/NIIT/2013/1638_12IT_2.html
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALS
CASE REF: 1638/12
CLAIMANT: Edna Stewart
RESPONDENT: Treehouse Kindergarten Ltd
DECISION ON AN APPLICATION FOR REVIEW
The application for review is successful. The decision of 8 October 2012 is hereby revoked. I am satisfied that these proceedings were never validly withdrawn. Accordingly, a dismissal order, pursuant to Rule 25 of the Industrial Tribunals Rules, is not appropriate.
Constitution of Tribunal:
Chairman (Sitting alone): Mr P Buggy
Appearances:
There was no appearance by or on behalf of the claimant.
The respondent was debarred from participating in the hearing because it had not presented any response.
REASONS
1. This Decision should be read in conjunction with a Decision on a pre-hearing review which was made in these proceedings on 16 November 2012.
2. The outcome of that PHR is that I decided that a letter dated 28 September 2012, which the claimant sent to the Office of the Industrial Tribunals, did not constitute a legally effective withdrawal of these proceedings.
3. I had made a dismissal order in these proceedings. That dismissal order was issued to the parties on 8 October 2012.
4. That dismissal order was made pursuant to Rule 25(4) of the Industrial Tribunals Rules.
5. Paragraph (4) of Rule 25 is in the following terms:
“Where the whole or part of the claim is withdrawn, the proceedings or the relevant part of the proceedings so withdrawn are brought to an end against the respondent on that date and the tribunal or chairman shall dismiss the proceedings or the relevant part of the proceedings so withdrawn …”
6. I made the dismissal order of October 2012 only because of my understanding, at that time, that the claimant had effectively withdrawn her claims in these proceedings.
7. The outcome of the PHR of 16 November, to which I have already referred above, is that, in reality, the letter of 28 September was not a valid withdrawal of these proceedings.
8. Accordingly, the dismissal order was not appropriate. Accordingly, under rule 34(3)(e) of the Industrial Tribunals Rules, this application for review is successful, and I have revoked that dismissal decision.
9. Against that background, and for the reasons indicated above, I am satisfied that it is “in the interests of justice” (within the meaning of Rule 34(3) of the Industrial Tribunals Rules) to revoke the dismissal order. Because there has been no valid withdrawal, Rule 25 provides no valid basis under which a new dismissal order could now be made.
Chairman:
Date and place of hearing: 16 November 2012, Belfast.
Date decision recorded in register and issued to parties: