Latest in Employment Law>Case Law>McCahon v Chief Constable of the PSNI [2024]
McCahon v Chief Constable of the PSNI [2024]
Published on: 16/12/2024
Issues Covered: Pay
Article Authors The main content of this article was provided by the following authors.
Jason Elliott BL
Jason Elliott BL
Background

Background:

The claimant was employed as a Police Officer from December 1984 until his retirement in June 2014. The claimant lodged a claim in November 2023 on foot of the decision in Agnew v Chief Constable of the PSNI  relating to holiday pay.  The claimant was seeking payment of what was termed as incorrectly calculated holiday pay.  It was not specified whether it was under the Working Time Regulations or unlawful deduction under the Employment Rights (NI) Order 1996.

The Tribunal had to determine whether it had jurisdiction to hear the claims.

Outcome:

The Tribunal noted that as the employment ended in June 2014, the claims were some nine years out of time.  The claimant submitted medical reports to contextualise his issues and the claim.   In the ET1 the claimant stated that he did not want to restrict the Tribunal system by making a claim until the issues had actually been determined (which took place in October 2023 with Agnew).  This demonstrated to the Tribunal that the claimant was waiting and he was aware of the ability to make the claim.  This contradicted evidence given that he was unaware he could make a claim.  Additionally, due to the medical issues the claimant argued that he had difficulty with routine administrative tasks yet there was evidence that he was able to conduct an appeal to the Department of Justice relating to an Injury on Duty award in 2017.

Taking the above into account the Tribunal found that the claim was grossly outside of the statutory time limits and there is a public interest in the finality of litigation.   The claimant was unable to show that it was not reasonable feasible for him to lodge his claim within the statutory time limit or a reasonable time thereafter. As a result, the Tribunal dismissed the claim for want of jurisdiction.

Practical Guidance for Employers:

Whilst the issue of time limits for those who have been serving and seeking holiday pay has been an issue going the whole way to the Supreme Court – this issue of an individual who no longer works for the PSNI seeking a claim was much easier in that it requires an examination of the normal rules for extending time.  As these were not met the claim was dismissed.

NI Tribunal decisions are available on the OITFET website:
http://www.employmenttribunalsni.co.uk/

Continue reading

We help hundreds of people like you understand how the latest changes in employment law impact your business.

Already a subscriber?

Please log in to view the full article.

What you'll get:

  • Help understand the ramifications of each important case from NI, GB and Europe
  • Ensure your organisation's policies and procedures are fully compliant with NI law
  • 24/7 access to all the content in the Legal Island Vault for research case law and HR issues
  • Receive free preliminary advice on workplace issues from the employment team

Already a subscriber? Log in now or start a free trial

Disclaimer The information in this article is provided as part of Legal Island's Employment Law Hub. We regret we are not able to respond to requests for specific legal or HR queries and recommend that professional advice is obtained before relying on information supplied anywhere within this article. This article is correct at 16/12/2024