![]() |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] [DONATE] | |||||||||
Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions |
||||||||||
PLEASE SUPPORT BAILII & FREE ACCESS TO LAW
To maintain its current level of service, BAILII urgently needs the support of its users.
Since you use the site, please consider making a donation to celebrate BAILII's 25 years of providing free access to law. No contribution is too small. If every visitor this month gives just £5, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing this vital service.
Thank you for your support! | ||||||||||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions >> Boylan v Pollock [2007] NIIT 395_07 (6 September 2007) URL: https://www.bailii.org/nie/cases/NIIT/2007/395_07.html Cite as: [2007] NIIT 395_7, [2007] NIIT 395_07 |
[New search] [View without highlighting] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
Case Ref: 395/07
CLAIMANT: Samuel Terence Boylan
RESPONDENTS: 1. John Pollock
2. Jim McKeown
3. University and College Union
The tribunal has concluded that the claimant's claim under Article 33 (1) of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Northern Ireland) Order 1995 was lodged outside the statutory time limit of three months. The tribunal has further concluded that there is insufficient evidence to establish on the balance of probabilities that it was not reasonably practicable for the claimant to have lodged his claim within the appropriate time, or that any delay was wholly or partly attributable to a reasonable attempt to appeal against the determination which was the subject of his complaint or to have it reconsidered or reviewed. The claimant's case therefore must fail in its entirety. Upon application of the respondent and with the consent of the claimant, the tribunal orders that the first and second respondents be removed from this claim. Any reference to the respondent therefore relates only to the third respondent.
Constitution of Tribunal:
Chairman: Mr T Browne (Sitting Alone)
Appearances
The claimant appeared and represented himself.
The respondent was represented by Mr Mark McEvoy, Barrister-at-law, instructed by the respondent's solicitor's office.
ISSUES
"shall not entertain such a complaint unless it is presented –
(a) before the end of the period of three months beginning with the date of the making of the determination claimed to infringe the right, or
(b) where the tribunal is satisfied—
(i) that it was not reasonably practicable for the complaint to be presented before the end of that period, or
(ii) that any delay in making the complaint is wholly or partly attributable to a reasonable attempt to appeal against the determination or to have it reconsidered or reviewed, within such further period as the tribunal considers reasonable."
FINDINGS OF FACT
e-mail being sent by John Pollock to the claimant and all of his colleagues, the contents of which in my opinion were clearly designed to publicly humiliate him.
e-mail on 7th December 2006.
e-mail, rather than the letter requesting his resignation. It also is significant that, despite indicating a desire to speak to Mr McKeown, the claimant did not specify to him the nature of what he wanted to discuss; nor did he ever try to make an appointment or other contact with Mr McKeown.
CONCLUSIONS
Chairman:
Date and place of hearing: 6 September 2007, Belfast.
Date decision recorded in register and issued to parties: