Silvinskas v Gary McBrien Mary Elizabeth Sweeney (in IVA... Ruairi Sweeney Robert Armstrong and C B Armst... [2013] NIIT 00682_12IT (25 October 2013)

Silvinskas v Gary McBrien Mary Elizabeth Sweeney (in IVA... Ruairi Sweeney Robert Armstrong and C B Armst... [2013] NIIT 00682_12IT (25 October 2013)

The tribunal found the claimant was unfairly dismissed by the first-named respondent, as statutory procedures were not followed and the employment did not transfer under TUPE. Compensation was limited to the period before the claimant refused alternative employment.

Citation
[2013] NIIT 00682_12IT
Parties
Claimant: Darius Slivinskas; Respondent: Gary McBrien; Respondent: Mary Elizabeth Sweeney (in IVA); Respondent: Ruairi Sweeney; Respondent: Robert Armstrong and C B Armstrong, t/a Squires Bar and Restaurant
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
25 October 2013
Procedural Posture
Industrial Tribunal Unfair Dismissal / Final Decision
Outcome
Claimant succeeded. Unfair dismissal found.
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Statutory Dismissal Procedures, Compensation Calculation, Holiday Pay, Transfer of Undertakings
Employment Law Unfair Dismissal Statutory Dismissal Procedures Compensation Calculation Holiday Pay Transfer of Undertakings

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Darius Slivinskas

Claimant

Gary McBrien

Respondent

Mary Elizabeth Sweeney (in IVA)

Respondent

Ruairi Sweeney

Respondent

Robert Armstrong and C B Armstrong, t/a Squires Bar and Restaurant

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Industrial Tribunal Unfair Dismissal / Final Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant was unfairly dismissed
  2. 2 Whether the correct employer was identified
  3. 3 Whether the claimant's employment transferred under TUPE

Ratio Decidendi

The tribunal found the claimant was unfairly dismissed by the first-named respondent, as statutory procedures were not followed and the employment did not transfer under TUPE. Compensation was limited to the period before the claimant refused alternative employment.

Court Disposition

Claimant succeeded. Unfair dismissal found.

Orders

  • First-named respondent to pay claimant £6,973.82 as compensation for unfair dismissal, holiday pay, and loss of statutory rights.