ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00052817
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Marina Tanasiev | Manolo Cafes Limited Esquires Coffee |
Representatives | Marius Marosan |
|
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-00064653-001 | 08/07/2024 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 | CA-00064653-002 | 08/07/2024 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00064653-003 | 08/07/2024 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977 | CA-00064653-004 | 08/07/2024 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 77 of the Employment Equality Act, 1998 | CA-00064653-005 | 08/07/2024 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 17/11/2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: David James Murphy
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 - 2015, and Section 79 of the Employment Equality Acts, 1998 - 2015, following the referral of the complaint(s)/dispute(s) to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint(s)/dispute(s) and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint(s)/dispute(s).
Background:
The Complainant submitted this complaint alongside ADJ-00052816. The Respondent in that matter was her employer. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant attended the hearing but proceeded against the Respondent outlined in ADJ-00052816. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent did not attend the hearing. |
Findings and Conclusions:
The Complainant was not employed by the Respondent and as such the complaints are not well founded. |
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.
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.
The complaints CA-00064653-001, CA-00064653-002, CA-00064653-003, CA-00064653-004 and CA-00064653-005 are not well founded. |
Dated: 04/12/2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: David James Murphy
Key Words:
|