FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 8A, UNFAIR DISMISSAL ACTS, 1977 TO 2015 PARTIES: FMS WERTMANAGEMENT SERVICE GMBH (REPRESENTED BY FMS WERTMANAGEMENT SERVICE GMBH) - AND - MR LEON O'CONNOR DIVISION:
SUBJECT: 1.Appeal Of Adjudication Officer Decision No(s)ADJ-00026985, CA-00034567-001 DETERMINATION: An Adjudication Officer decided that the complaint was not well founded. The Complainant appealed to this Court. A Court hearing in person took place on 17 November 2022. Both parties submitted significant documentation in support of their case. Both parties made extensive verbal submissions. The Respondent called a number of witnesses who gave evidence in chief and the witnesses were cross examined by the Complainant. At the conclusion of that hearing, Ms. Davey, for the Respondent, made application to the Court that the next hearing be conducted as a remote hearing because one of the Respondent’s witnesses was now based in the United States. The Complainant raised no objection and the Court agreed to the application. On 10 March 2023, the Court sent, by post and email, notification to both parties of a remote hearing to take place on 18 May 2023. In advance of that date, on 15 May 2023, the Court emailed both parties seeking details of attendees for the remote hearing. These details were provided by the Respondent. No response was received from the Complainant. A further email with the Webex invitation was sent to the Complainant on 16 May 2023, when he failed to respond to the email of 15 May 2023. In the absence of a response from the Complainant, on 18 May 2023, the date set for the hearing, the Division of the Court requested the Court Secretary to attempt to contact the Complainant by telephone. The call was not answered and there was no voicemail facility to leave a message. The Court notes that there was extensive correspondence between the Complainant and the Court by email both before and subsequent to the hearing on 17 November 2022 and that the emails from the Court regarding the hearing on 18 May 2023 were sent to the email address from which the Complainant had previously engaged so extensively with the Court. Furthermore, notification of the hearing was sent by post to the Complainant’s home address. In addition, the Court attempted to contact the Complainant by telephone. Accordingly, the Court is satisfied that every reasonable effort was made to ensure that the Complainant was aware that the hearing was taking place on 18 May 2023 and that every possible form of communication was utilised to make him so aware. Despite the considerable efforts of the Court, the Complainant failed to attend the hearing on 18 May 2023. No request for postponement had been received in advance. Therefore, the Complainant failed to attend a hearing, the purpose of which was to consider his appeal. As a consequence, the Court is obliged to determine that the appeal must fail. Determination. The Decision of the Adjudication Officer is upheld.
NOTE Enquiries concerning this Determination should be addressed to David Campbell, Court Secretary. |
