ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00026985
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | Credit analyst | Financial Services company |
Representatives | Kieran McCarthy & Co., | McCann FitzGerald. Ms Emma Davey, B.L. |
Complaint(s):
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977 | CA-00034567-001 | 11/02/2020 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 28/03/2022
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Maire Mulcahy
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 - 2015, following the referral of the complaint to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint. On the 28/3/2022 a remote hearing was set up in accordance with the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2020 and Statutory Instrument 359/2020 which designates the Workplace Relations Commission as a body empowered to hold remote hearings.
Anonymisation of parties’ names.
Section 9 of The Workplace Relations (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2021 amended section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977 by the substitution of the following subsection for subsection (6)
“Proceedings under this section before an adjudication officer shall be conducted in public unless the adjudication officer, of his or her own motion or upon the application by or on behalf of a party to the proceedings, determines that, due to the existence of special circumstances, the proceedings (or part thereof) should be conducted otherwise than in public”
I decide that the evidence submitted indicates that the state of health of the complainant amounts to “special circumstances”. Accordingly, I decide that this decision should be anonymised.
Background:
The complainant submitted a complaint on 11 February 2020 that the respondent had unfairly dismissed him on the 21 August 2019, contrary to the provisions of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977-2015. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The complainant did not attend the hearing. On the 25/3/22 the complainant sent an email to the WRC stating that he wished to obtain alternative legal representation. The complainant ‘s solicitor attended the hearing on the 28/3/22 to advise that he was coming off record for the complainant as he could not be confident that the complainant’s health would allow the complainant to understand and follow his solicitor’s advice. He has contacted the complainant’s family in this regard. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The respondent attended the hearing. The respondent has not had sight of any medical evidence which might justify a postponement. The respondent requested that the case be struck out in accordance with section 48 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015. In the alternate, the respondent submits that the complaint be deemed to be unfounded on the basis of the complainant’s failure to attend the hearing on the 28/3/2022. The respondent recommended that the decision be anonymised in view of the complainant’s health. |
Findings and Conclusions:
The complainant did not attend the hearing. I am satisfied that the said complainant was informed in writing on 14/2/2022 of the date, time and place at which the hearing to investigate the complaint would be held. On the 25/3/22, on foot of a request from the WRC to furnish his attendance list for the hearing, the complainant advised that he wished to seek alternative legal representation. No evidence was presented to the WRC to support this request. No medical evidence was submitted to the WRC. In all of the circumstances and in the absence of any evidence to the contrary having been adduced before me, I must conclude that the within complaint is not well-founded and I decide accordingly. |
Decision:
Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 – 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the unfair dismissal claim consisting of a grant of redress in accordance with section 7 of the 1977 Act.
I do not find this complaint to be well founded. |
Dated: 28th April 2022
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Maire Mulcahy
Key Words:
No show. |