ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION/RECOMMENDATION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00031478
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Karen Doyle | Maryphad Limited |
Representatives | Michael O’Donerty, B.L. instructed by Hatstone (Ireland) LLP Solicitors | Declan Harmon, B.L. instructed by O’Regan Little Solicitors |
Complaints:
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Regulation 18 of the European Communities (Road Transport)(Organisation of Working Time of Persons Performing Mobile Road Transport Activities) Regulations 2012 - S.I. No. 36/2012 | CA-00041838-003 | 07/01/2021 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Act, 1967 | CA-00041838-005 | 07/01/2021 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 | CA-00041838-006 | 07/01/2021 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 12 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973 | CA-00041838-007 | 07/01/2021 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 12 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973 | CA-00041838-008 | 07/01/2021 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00041838-009 | 07/01/2021 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 77 of the Employment Equality Act, 1998 | CA-00043011-001 | 11/03/2021 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 77 of the Employment Equality Act, 1998 | CA-00043011-002 | 11/03/2021 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Regulation 18 of the European Communities (Road Transport)(Organisation of Working Time of Persons Performing Mobile Road Transport Activities) Regulations 2012 - S.I. No. 36/2012 | CA-00043011-003 | 11/03/2021 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 | CA-00043011-005 | 11/03/2021 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 12 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973 | CA-00043011-006 | 11/03/2021 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00043011-007 | 11/03/2021 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 23/03/2022
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Conor Stokes
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 following the referral of the complaints to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaints and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaints.
Background:
This matter was heard by way of remote hearing pursuant to the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 2020 and S.I. No. 359/2020 which designates the WRC as a body empowered to hold remote hearings. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The complainant agreed at the outset that the incorrect respondent was cited in relation to these complaints. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The respondent submitted at the outset that the incorrect respondent was cited in relation to these complaints. |
Findings and Conclusions:
The parties agreed that the respondent cited was not the correct respondent in relation to these complaints. |
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaints in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.
As the correct respondent was not cited in relation to these complaints, my decision is that the legislation has not been breached and that these complaints are not well founded. |
Dated: 24-03-22
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Conor Stokes
Key Words:
Incorrect Respondent cited – no breach of legislation - complaints not well founded. |