Gorman v MMD Communications Ltd [2012] NIIT 01128_11IT (12 January 2012)

Gorman v MMD Communications Ltd [2012] NIIT 01128_11IT (12 January 2012)

The claim was presented outside the statutory three-month time limit, and the claimant failed to discharge the burden of showing it was not reasonably practicable to present the claim in time; therefore, the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear the claim.

Citation
[2012] NIIT 01128_11IT
Parties
Claimant: Hugh Gorman; Respondent: MMD Communications Ltd
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
12 January 2012
Procedural Posture
Employment Tribunal / Jurisdictional Ruling
Outcome
claim dismissed for want of jurisdiction
Legal Topics
Breach of Contract, Jurisdiction, Time Limits, Overtime Pay, Fixed Term Contracts
Employment Law Breach of Contract Jurisdiction Time Limits Overtime Pay Fixed Term Contracts

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hugh Gorman

Claimant

MMD Communications Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Tribunal / Jurisdictional Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's originating claim was presented within the statutory three-month time limit under Article 7 of the Industrial Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction Order (Northern Ireland) 1994
  2. 2 Whether it was not reasonably practicable for the complaint to be presented within that period and, if so, whether it was presented within such further period as the tribunal considers reasonable
  3. 3 Whether the claimant was employed on a twelve-month contract and entitled to payment for 437 hours overtime and wages

Ratio Decidendi

The claim was presented outside the statutory three-month time limit, and the claimant failed to discharge the burden of showing it was not reasonably practicable to present the claim in time; therefore, the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear the claim.

Court Disposition

claim dismissed for want of jurisdiction