ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION

Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00051222

Parties:

	Complainant	Respondent
Parties	Dominique Nsambu Ndungidi	Madigans Pub

Representatives

No appearance

Lucinda Madigan

Complaint(s):

Act	Complaint/Dispute Reference No.	Date of Receipt
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 21 Equal Status Act, 2000	CA-00058930-002	13/02/2024
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 12 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973	CA-00058930-005	13/02/2024
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 77 of the Employment Equality Act, 1998	CA-00058930-001	19/09/2023

Date of Adjudication Hearing: 22/11/2024

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Michael MacNamee

Procedure:

In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and Section 79 of the Employment Equality Acts, 1998 - 2015, and Section 25 of the Equal Status Act, 2000, 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:

The above claims were listed for hearing before me at the offices of the Workplace Relations Commission (“the WRC”) on the 22nd of November 2024 at 11 am. Both parties had been notified of the time, date and venue for the adjudication hearing.

There was no appearance by or on behalf of the Complainant. No communication was received from or on behalf of the Complainant prior to the date and time of the hearing.

The Respondent’s representative attended the adjudication hearing with witnesses and the Respondent was ready to proceed with the hearing.

At 11:33 am, in the absence of any appearance or communication from or on behalf of the Complainant, the hearing was concluded.

Subsequent to the conclusion of the adjudication hearing, the Complainant arrived at Lansdowne House at approximately 12:40 pm. He emailed the WRC that day as follows:

“From: ndungidi dominique Sent: 22 November 2024 13:34 To: WRC Post Registration Unit (PRU) Subject: Late for hiring ref C00058930/001 C00058930/002 C0005830/005

Late to 12 40 pm

Hello i am comming to you firste to apologise

To late today in the complaint i made .

I am disabled with steal for the paste 10 year amd steal not finish with wetting operation for back probleme whit the cole started i got smole probleme in the morning with crumpets made difficute to working and confuse me for today i am asking you for consideration for news hiring please for the good of equalled thanks M for Madigan managemtnt”

[email addresses redacted]

In a letter from the WRC to the parties dated the 2nd of December 2024, the above email was quoted and the following direction was issued to the Complainant and copied to the Respondent:

“As the Adjudicator understands this message, he is being asked to allocate a new hearing date to the case. The Adjudicator has not made a decision in the matter one way or another. Before any decision is made, the parties are directed as follows:

The Complainant must present a full and detailed account in English of the reasons for his non-attendance at the hearing on the 22nd of November 2024.If as appears to be thecase, the Complainant is requesting a new hearing date before the Adjudicator he should so confirm - in writing. If, as appears to have been the case, a medical issue arose for the Complainant on the morning of the hearing, he should provide a full and detailed explanation together with any available medical evidence. The Complainant is directed to comply in writing and in full with this direction by close of business on Friday the 6th of December 2024. Please quote Reference: ADJ-00051222 on all future correspondence to the WRC.
Any and all documentation received from the Complainant in accordance with the above direction will be copied to the Respondent. At that time, assuming that the Complainant is indeed seeking a new hearing date before the adjudicator, the Respondent should indicate whether it consents or objects and if the latter to state the grounds of objection. The Respondent is directed to comply within one week of the date on which the Complainant complies with direction 1, above. The Respondent should await the Complainant’s explanation and documentation as requested before replying.

If the Complainant does not comply with Direction 1. above, the Adjudicator will proceed to issue his decision in the matter. “

The Respondent delivered a written submission dated the 18th of December 2024 (amongst other issues) objecting to a relisting of the matter. This submission was forwarded to the Complainant and a written response was invited by the 15th of January 2025. Noting that no response was received a reminder was sent to the Complainant on the 27th of January 2025 requesting an immediate response. No response was received.

Summary of Complainant’s Case:

There was no appearance by or on behalf of the Complainant

Summary of Respondent’s Case:

The Respondent delivered written submissions and all claims were disputed.

Findings and Conclusions:

I am satisfied that the Complainant was notified of the time, date and venue allocated for the Adjudication Hearing. The Respondent was present with witnesses and was ready to proceed with the Hearing. The Respondent indicated that it had been put to inconvenience and expense in attending the Adjudication Hearing to contest the claims and that the Respondent was ready to proceed at the appointed time.

From the Complainant’s attendance at 12: 40 pm at the offices of the WRC on the date of the hearing it is clear that he was fully aware of the hearing date, time and venue. Later that day he delivered an email seeking to explain his non attendance at 11 am. This email was forwarded to the Respondent who delivered a detailed reply. The Respondent’s said reply was forwarded to the Complainant who was given an opportunity to reply and a further reminder was sent but no further communication was received from the Complainant.

Being mindful of the necessity to afford procedural fairness to both parties, I am satisfied that the Complainant has been provided with a reasonable opportunity to explain his non-attendance and I am further satisfied that the Respondent has been put to inconvenience and expense in attending the hearing.

In all of the circumstances I am satisfied that the Complainant has not attended the Adjudication Hearing and that accordingly, the Respondent has no case to answer. For this reason, all of the claims will be dismissed.

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 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 25 of the Equal Status Acts, 2000 – 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under section 27 of that Act.

CA-00058930-002 - Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 21 Equal Status Act, 2000

Decision: The Respondent did not discriminate against the Complainant

CA-00058930-005 - Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 12 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973

Decision: The Claim is not well-founded

CA-00058930-001 - Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 77 of the Employment Equality Act, 1998

Decision: The Respondent did not discriminate against the Complainant

Dated: 28th March 2025

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Michael MacNamee

Key Words:

No appearance