THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALS 

CASE REF:	2731/01

APPLICANT:	Dermot Healey-Fenton	

RESPONDENTS:	1.   Group 7 PLC
2.	Modelguide Limited
3.	Bon Appetit Food & Wines Limited	

DECISION

The unanimous decision of the tribunal is that this complaint will have to be listed before a newly constituted tribunal to determine all matters arising between the parties.
Appearances:
The applicant was represented by Ms Donaldson, Barrister at Law, instructed by Mills Selig Solicitors.
The respondents were not present. 

SUMMARY REASONS
1.	The applicant alleged that he was unfairly dismissed from his employment with the first named respondent on 1 June 2001.  Further he alleged that the termination of his employment without the prescribed notice provided for in his terms and conditions of employment was a breach of his contract of employment.

2.	The only party to give oral evidence was the applicant.  No one appeared on behalf of the respondents so the tribunal accepted the Notice of Appearance as the evidence of the respondents.

3.	The tribunal having heard the evidence convened a panel meeting to consider their decision.  Subsequently the tribunal was informed that the requisite notices of hearing for the               1 April 2004 were not properly served on the respondents.  While on the day of hearing it was indicated to the tribunal that none of the respondents had appeared that day, no explanation was tendered for their non-attendance.

4.	On perusal of the files held by the Office of the Industrial Tribunals and Fair Employment Tribunal the tribunal noted that correspondence to the second named respondent had been returned to the Office of the Industrial Tribunals and Fair Employment Tribunal marked “gone away” in May 2003.  Correspondence for the first named respondent was returned as undelivered in November 2003.

5.	The tribunal noted that the Office of the Industrial Tribunals and Fair Employment Tribunal sent the notices of hearing for the 1 April 2004 in February 2004 to addresses from which previous correspondence had been returned as undelivered.  The tribunal considers that this failure to serve due and proper notice of hearing is a breach of Rule 5 of Schedule 1 of the Industrial Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 1996.

6.	The applicant, at hearing, raised no issue as to the status of the document forwarded to the Office of the Industrial Tribunals and Fair Employment Tribunal under cover of letter dated 21 October 2003 when solicitors acting on behalf of the applicant requested that “an order in the terms of the agreement reached between the parties” be issued.  This request was not referred to a Chairman of the Industrial Tribunals.  The Office of the Industrial Tribunals and Fair Employment Tribunal listed the complaint for hearing.  It appears to this tribunal that the document purports to be written terms of settlement agreed between the parties in September 2003.  This tribunal considers that the jurisdiction of the tribunal to determine this complaint, in light of this document, would require to be determined by way of a preliminary hearing.

7.	The tribunal, regrettably, consider there is no alternative but that this complaint will have to be re-listed before a differently constituted tribunal.

Chairman:

Date and place of hearing:      1 April 2004, Belfast.

Date decision recorded in register and issued to parties: