|
FULL RECOMMENDATION
REDUNDANCY PAYMENTS ACTS, 1967 TO 2014 PARTIES : PEARLSTONE INVESTMENTS LIMITED IL FICO RESTAURANT (REPRESENTED BY COONAN CAWLEY SOLICITORS) - AND - MR GABOR ROZSA (REPRESENTED BY BURNS NOWLAN LLP SOLICITORS) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Foley Employer Member: Mr Marie Worker Member: Mr McCarthy |
1. Appeal Of Adjudication Officer Decision No. ADJ-00023923
BACKGROUND:
2. The Claimant appealed the Decision of the Adjudication Officer to the Labour Court on 31 December 2019 in accordance with the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967 to 2014. A Labour Court hearing took place on 21 February 2020. The following is the Determination of the Court:
DETERMINATION :
This is an appeal by Gabor Rozsa (the Appellant) against a decision of an Adjudication Officer on a claim against his former employer made under the Redundancy Payments Act, 1967. The decision of the Adjudication Officer identified the Respondent as ‘Pearlstone Investments Limited IL Fico Restaurant’. Representatives of Pearlstone Investments Limited (PIL) attended the hearing of the Court.
Preliminary Issue
The representatives of PIL raised as a preliminary issue a contention that the decision of the Adjudication Officer and the within appeal are directed against an entity which was not the employer of the Appellant at the material time or at all.
The representatives of PIL submitted that the Respondent was employed by an entity called IL Fico Italian Restaurant Limited trading as Il Fico Restaurant.
The Appellant also submitted to the Court that the entity named in the appeal and on the face of the decision of the Adjudication Officer was not his employer. He submitted that he was employed by Il Fico Italian Restaurant Limited trading as Il Fico Restaurant and that this was the employer specified on his contract of employment and understood by him at all times to be his employer.
The representatives of PIL submitted that the Court held no jurisdiction to alter the decision of the Adjudication Officer or to empanel another Respondent at the hearing of the Court. That submission was not disputed by the Appellant.
In circumstances where both parties agree that the Respondent identified on the face of the decision of the Adjudication Officer and in the within appeal was not the employer of the Appellant at the material time or at all the within appeal cannot proceed and must fail.
Determination
The Court determines that the within appeal fails and the decision of the Adjudication Officer must, as a consequence and having regard to the Act at Section 39A(ii), be affirmed notwithstanding the fact that the decision purports to apply to a Respondent submitted by the Appellant to have not been his employer at any material time or at all.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Foley
10 March 2020 ______________________
H.M. Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Determination should be addressed to Heather Murray, Court Secretary.