ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00054702
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Martin Dempsey | D & D Agriculture Limited trading as Goff Agri & Plant Sales |
Representatives | No Appearance | Diana Goff and Damian Goff |
Complaint:
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977 | CA-00066599-001 | 10/10/2024 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 21/03/2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Christina Ryan
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 and/or Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts 1977 as amended, following the referral of the complaint to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint.
This matter was heard by way of a remote hearing on the 21st March 2025 pursuant to the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2020 and S.I. 359/2020, which designated the WRC as a body empowered to hold remote hearings.
The Respondent confirmed its correct legal name which is cited on consent in the Decision.
I received and reviewed the Complainant’s WRC Complaint Form and the written submissions and documentation from the Respondent prior to the hearing.
By letter dated the 25th February 2025 the Complainant was notified that a remote hearing of his complaint would take place via Webex platform on the 21st March 2025. The hearing link was sent to the Complainant by letter dated the 18th March 2025. It is apparent from his communications with the WRC that the Complainant was on notice of the hearing date and time and the fact that it was a remote hearing via Webex platform.
Despite repeated requests by the WRC the Complainant failed, refused and/or neglected to furnish it with an email address in advance of the hearing.
At the time the hearing was to commence, it was apparent that there was no attendance by or on behalf of the Complainant. I verified that the Complainant was on notice of the date, time and venue of the hearing and waited some time to accommodate a late arrival. The Respondent was in attendance and was represented by Diana Goff and Damian Goff. Three witnesses attended the hearing to give evidence on behalf of the Respondent. The Complainant did not attend and I opened the hearing. After the hearing was opened the Complainant made contact with the WRC and furnished it with an alternative email address. The hearing link was again sent to the Complainant by the WRC. I waited a further period of time to accommodate the Complainant’s arrival however when there was no appearance or further communication from the Complainant I closed the hearing.
Background:
The Complainant referred a complaint to the WRC on the 10th October 2024 under the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977 as amended. The Respondent submitted a full defence to the Complainant’s complaint. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant did not attend the hearing of this matter. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent submitted written submissions and documentation in advance of the hearing which contained a full defence to the Complainant’s complaint. The Respondent attended the hearing and was prepared to present evidence. |
Findings and Conclusions:
The Complainant referred the within complaint to the WRC on the 10th October 2024. No written submissions or supporting documentation were submitted by the Complainant to the WRC in advance of the hearing. At the time the hearing was to commence, it was apparent that there was no attendance by or on behalf of the Complainant. I verified that the Complainant was on notice of the date, time and venue of the hearing and waited some time to accommodate a late arrival. The Complainant failed to appear at the time of the hearing and I waited enough time to allow him to appear. Taking into consideration all of the circumstances of the instance case I have concluded that Complainant had no valid reason for non-attendance and not having attended his complaint fails. |
Decision:
Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 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.
Having regard to all the circumstances of this case, my decision is that the Complainant was not unfairly dismissed and that this complaint is not well founded. |
Dated: 26th March 2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Christina Ryan
Key Words:
|