ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00038981
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Ava Middleton | Kilcullen Asian World Food Ltd |
Representatives | No Appearance | Self-Represented |
Complaints:
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-00049928-001 | 25/04/2022 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977 | CA-00049928-002 | 25/04/2022 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 12 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973 | CA-00049928-003 | 25/04/2022 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 25/11/2022
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Brian Dolan
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015and Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 - 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:
On 25th April 2022, the Complainant referred the present complaints to the Commission. An in-person hearing in relation to these matters was convened for, and finalised on, 25th November 2022.
The Complainant did not attend the hearing as scheduled. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant did not attend the hearing as scheduled. Having reviewed the file, I am satisfied that the Complainant was informed of the date, time and venue of the hearing. In particular, I note that the invite to hearing was posted to the address provided by the Complainant and that the same was further issued by email. In addition to the foregoing, I note no application was made by any party to have the matter postponed, nor was any explanation provided for the Complainant’s absence following the hearing. Having regard to the proceeding points, the matter proceeded in the Complainant’s absence. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent attended the hearing and advised that they were fully prepared to defend all allegations raised by the Complainant. However, in circumstances whereby the Complainant did not attend, they submitted that the complaints must fail. |
Findings and Conclusions:
In circumstances whereby the Complainant did not attend the hearing to give evidence in support of the complaints, I find that the same are not well-founded. |
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.
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.
CA-00044928-001 Complaint under the Terms of Employment (Information) Act In circumstances whereby the Complainant did not attend the hearing to prosecute the complaint, I find that the same is not well-founded. CA-00044928-002 Complaint under the Unfair Dismissals Act In circumstances whereby the Complainant did not attend the hearing to prosecute the complaint, I find that the Complainant was not unfairly dismissed and consequently her compalint is not well-founded. CA-00044928-003 Complaint under the Minimum Notice of Terms of Employment Act In circumstances whereby the Complainant did not attend the hearing to prosecute the complaint, I find that the same is not well-founded. |
Dated: 06/01/2023
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Brian Dolan
Key Words:
Non-attendance |