Guggenheim v Peter McCloskey Pater Oliver Hairdressing [2012] NIIT 02985_11IT (24 April 2012)
The claims were dismissed due to the claimant's failure to appear and lack of explanation for absence, after consideration of available information including the claim form.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2012] NIIT 02985_11IT
- Parties
- Claimant: Daniel Guggenheim; Respondent: Peter McCloskey; Respondent: Peter Oliver Hairdressing
- Jurisdiction
- Northern Ireland
- Judgment Date
- 24 April 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Industrial Tribunal / Final Judgment
- Outcome
- Claims dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Unfair Dismissal, Disability Discrimination
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Daniel Guggenheim
Claimant
Peter McCloskey
Respondent
Peter Oliver Hairdressing
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Industrial Tribunal / Final Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the claimant was unfairly dismissed
- 2 Whether the claimant was subjected to disability discrimination
Ratio Decidendi
The claims were dismissed due to the claimant's failure to appear and lack of explanation for absence, after consideration of available information including the claim form.
Court Disposition
Claims dismissed
Orders
- Claimant’s claims of unfair dismissal and disability discrimination are dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
02985_11IT Guggenheim v Peter McCloskey Pater Oliver Hairdressing [2012] NIIT 02985_11IT (24 April 2012) [ Home ] [ Databases ] [ World Law ] [ Multidatabase Search ] [ Help ] [ Feedback ] [ DONATE ] Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions >> Guggenheim v Peter McCloskey Pater Oliver Hairdressing [2012] NIIT 02985_11IT (24 April 2012) URL: https://www.bailii.org/nie/cases/NIIT/2012/02985_11IT.html Cite as: [2012] NIIT 2985_11IT, [2012] NIIT 02985_11IT [ New search ] [ Printable RTF version ] [ Help ] THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALS CASE REF: 2985/11 CLAIMANT: Daniel Guggenheim RESPONDENTS: 1. Peter McCloskey 2. Peter Oliver Hairdressing DECISION The unanimous decision of the tribunal is that the claimant’s claims of unfair dismissal and disability discrimination be dismissed. Constitution of Tribunal: Chairman: Mr D Buchanan Members: Mr B Schofield Mr D Atcheson Appearances: The claimant did not appear and was not represented. The first-named respondent appeared in person and was not represented. The second-named respondent did not appear and was not represented. 1. The claimant did not appear at the hearing. We were satisfied he had received notice of the proceedings; and no explanation was provided for his absence. 2. No response was entered. The first-named respondent appeared in person. A letter had been received from his accountants, but no application had been made to treat it as a response, nor had any explanation been given as to why the time-limits for submitting a response could not have been complied with. 3. The tribunal dismissed the claimant’s claims. Before doing so it considered information in its possession which had been made available to it by the parties, including the claimant’s claim form. Chairman: Date and place of hearing: 24 April 2012, Belfast Date decision recorded in register and issued to parties: BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII URL: https://www.bailii.org/nie/cases/NIIT/2012/02985_11IT.html