ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00032661
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Grzegorz Walasek | Radisson Blu Hotel, Dublin Airport |
Representatives |
| Aoife McDonnell TO ISSUE BY EMAIL TO: cases@ibec.ie |
Complaint(s):
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 | CA-00042306-001 | 03/02/2021 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 | CA-00042306-002 | 03/02/2021 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under the Industrial Relations Acts | CA-00042306-003 | 03/02/2021 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 77 of the Employment Equality Act, 1998 | CA-00042306-004 | 03/02/2021 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00042306-005 | 03/02/2021 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00042306-006 | 03/02/2021 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00042306-007 | 03/02/2021 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00042306-008 | 03/02/2021 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 23/08/2021
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Niamh O'Carroll
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 - 2015, Section 79 of the Employment Equality Acts, 1998 - 2015 and Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts 1969 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:
|
Preliminary Application – Respondent.
Res Judicata. A matter in relation to the Payment of Wages Act, ADJ 28198, was previously heard by Ms. O’ Carroll on the 9th December 2020. The particulars of claim are documented within the decision and are also set out in the original claim form. The decision was appealed and following a hearing the decision was upheld. The particulars of that claim are the same as those submitted in this claim form even though the complainant has now filed the same complaint under various different headings. The parties are also the same. On that basis the matter is Res Judicata. |
Preliminary Application – Complainant’s Reply:
The complainant was hoping to have all of the issues address at the hearing on the 9th December last but because he had not ticked the correct boxes he was prevented from doing so. He was not on notice that there would be an issue with the matter proceeding today so he was not prepared for the argument. He only became aware of some of the issues he wanted addressed at the hearing on the 9th December and that is why he filed the new claims. He is very unhappy with the decision following the hearing on the 9th December and of the Appeal. He doesn’t accept it. |
Findings and Conclusions:
The complainant filed his eight claims on the 03.02.2021. Two pursuant to the Terms of Employment (information) Act, one pursuant to the Unfair Dismissals Act, one pursuant to the Employment Equality Acts, three pursuant to the Payment of Wages Act and one pursuant to the Organisation of Working Time Act. The narrative for each of the claims is identical to the within claims. The narrative sets out an issue in relation to his pay, lay-off, contractually agreed rate, pandemic payment, tax deductions and emergency tax. Within that narrative is a copy of the narrative set out in his claim form from 2020, ADJ 28198. The issues are identical. The complainant is clearly unhappy with the decision issued in 2020 and with the decision of the Labour Court on Appeal and wants the issue reconsidered. The Respondent argues that the matter has already been decided, not only by the WRC but also by the Labour Court and therefore cannot be reconsidered today. The doctrine of Res Judicata prohibits the reopening of issues which have already been decided between the parties by a competent Court or Tribunal. Lord Shaw in Bradshaw v McMullan [ 1920] IR 412 stated “the overriding consideration with regards to res judicate is that there should have been a judicium. That is to say, that the merits of the identical dispute between the identical parties, on the identical subject matter, and on the same media should have been settled by judgement. The judicial mind should have been applied to it. This is the principle, familiar and fundamental. “The doctrine will apply not only to a Court of competent jurisdiction but also to a tribunal exercising a judicial function with jurisdiction to enter upon the adjudication and to make the order or declaration sought” O’ Driscoll -v- Dunne [2015] IEHC 100 I am fully satisfied that the WRC meets the criteria set out in O’ Driscoll v-v Dunne. I am further satisfied that the claim heard by me in December 2020 is identical to the claims before me today. The matter was heard in full, and the complainant was given every opportunity to air his complaints. Following the hearing a reasoned decision issued. It was appealed and following appeal the decision was upheld. The subject matter of the within claim is identical, the parties are identical, and the forum is identical. I can find no distinguishing fact that could allow me adjudicate on these complaints again today. Therefore, the complaints fail. |
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.
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.
Section 79 of the Employment Equality Acts, 1998 – 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under section 82 of the Act.
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts, 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.
CA 00 42306 – 01. The complaint fails. CA 00 42306 – 02. The complaint fails. CA 00 42306 – 03. The complaint fails. CA 00 42306 – 04. The complaint fails. CA 00 42306 – 05. The complaint fails. CA 00 42306 – 06. The complaint fails. CA 00 42306 – 07. The complaint fails. CA 00 42306 – 08. The complaint fails. |
Dated: 5th October 2022
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Niamh O'Carroll
Key Words:
Res Judicata, Statute of Limitation. |