ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION

Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00040926

Parties:

	Complainant	Respondent
Parties	Ashok Bhoopathy	LVMH Perfume & Cosmetics

Complaint(s):

Act	Complaint 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-00050659-001	12/05/2022
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994	CA-00050659-002	12/05/2022
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 77 of the Employment Equality Act, 1998	CA-00050659-004	12/05/2022
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Schedule 2 of the Employment Permits Act, 2006	CA-00050659-005	12/05/2022
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 25 of the Protection of Employees (Temporary Agency Work) Act, 2012	CA-00050659-006	12/05/2022
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 25 of the Protection of Employees (Temporary Agency Work) Act, 2012	CA-00050659-007	12/05/2022
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997	CA-00050659-008	12/05/2022
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997	CA-00050659-009	12/05/2022
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 6(1) of the Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act 2010	CA-00050659-010	12/05/2022
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 16 of the Protection of Employees (Part-Time Work) Act, 2001	CA-00050659-011	12/05/2022
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977	CA-00050659-015	24/05/2022

Date of Adjudication Hearing: 03/10/2023

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Pat Brady

Procedure:

In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, and/or 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.

Summary of Complainant’s Case:

The complainant did not attend the hearing.

Summary of Respondent’s Case:

The respondent did not attend the hearing.

Findings and Conclusions:

A complaint was received by the Director General of the Workplace Relations Commission by the complainant alleging breaches of the above statutes and was referred to me for investigation.

There was no appearance by or on behalf of the complainant (or the respondent) at the hearing.

I am satisfied that the complainant consented to receiving correspondence by email and was sent notice in writing to the address provided on the complaint form of the date, time and place at which the hearing to investigate the complaint would be held.

In these 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 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint(s)/dispute(s) 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.

Fr the reasons set out above none of the complaints under CA-50659 are well founded.

Dated: 24th October 2023

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Pat Brady

Key Words:

No show by complainant.