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 >> Hamiltonand others v Fire and Flooring Systems Ltd Roy Bell Simon Bell Pyroseal Ltd Roy Adamson Pyroseal NI Ltd [2015] NIIT 00557_15IT (18 August 2015)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/nie/cases/NIIT/2015/00557_15IT.html
Cite as: [2015] NIIT 557_15IT, [2015] NIIT 00557_15IT
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALS
CASE REFS: 557/15
667/15
668/15
669/15
670/15
671/15
672/15
673/15
674/15
682/15
1007/15
CLAIMANTS: 1. Renwick Mark Hamilton
2. Alexander James Gemmell
3. Thomas Stewart
4. Robert Noel Lindsay
5. Roy William Crawford
6. Samuel Annett
7. Steven Warnock
8. David William Andrew Hodges
9. William John Duffield
10. Steve Greenhill
11. Graham Thomas Nelson
RESPONDENTS: 1. Fire and Flooring Systems Ltd
2. Roy Bell
3. Simon Bell
4. Pyroseal Ltd
5. Roy Adamson
6. Pyrotech NI Ltd
DECISION
Constitution of Tribunal:
Employment Judge: Employment Judge McCaffrey
Members: Mr J Devlin
Mr D Walls
Appearances:
The claimants appeared in person and represented themselves.
The respondents were represented by Mr M Boyd, Barrister-at-Law instructed by Sheena Murphy of Murphy's Solicitors.
DECISION
1. This matter was heard over two days. At the end of the hearing we gave an oral decision and indicated that we would give written reasons, together with calculations of the amounts due to the claimants later. However, given that we have been advised that there will be a meeting of creditors of the first-named respondent company on 20 August 2015, we thought it appropriate to issue a short decision on the issue of liability in advance of that meeting.
2. All of the claimants were employed by the first-named respondent company which ceased trading on 7 January 2015. It was conceded by Counsel for the sixth-named respondent that each of the claimants was entitled to be paid amounts in relation to redundancy pay, notice pay, arrears of pay and outstanding pay in lieu of holidays accrued but untaken. A schedule showing calculations of the amounts conceded as due to the claimant, which had been provided by the first-named respondents' account, was provided to the tribunal. The issue for us to decide was whether the first-named respondent was responsible for these payments of whether the claimants' employment had transferred to the sixth-named respondent under the Transfer of Undertakings and Protection of Employment Regulations 2006 ("TUPE").
3. It is the unanimous decision of the tribunal that we are satisfied on the basis of the evidence given that Mr Warnock (case reference number 672/15) transferred his employment to the sixth-named respondent on 8 January 2015 after the first-named respondent ceased trading. Accordingly, his claim for redundancy pay and notice pay is dismissed.
4. We are also satisfied that none of the other claimants' employment transferred to the sixth-named respondent for reasons which we will set out in more detail in our judgment and that they are entitled to be paid by the first-named respondent sums in respect of redundancy pay and other sums as individually claimed. We will set out these amounts in detail in the written reasons for decision.
Employment Judge
Date and place of hearing: 12 and 13 August 2015, Belfast.
Date decision recorded in register and issued to parties: