This website contains decisions and determinations of both the Labour Court and the WRC. It also contains decisions and recommendations of the Equality Tribunal since 1996 and post 2007 determinations of the Employment Appeals Tribunal. For more information click here
UDD2170
|
FULL RECOMMENDATION
|
UD/19/229
ADJ-00021483 CA-00027723-006
|
DETERMINATION NO. UDD2170
|
SECTION 8A, UNFAIR DISMISSAL ACTS, 1977 TO 2015
PARTIES :
FLANNERYS BAR LTD, FLANNERYS BAR GLASHEEN LTD, (REPRESENTED BY BDM BOYLAN SOLICITORS) - AND - MR FREDERICK KIDNEY
DIVISION :
|
Chairman:
|
Ms O'Donnell
|
|
Employer Member:
|
Mr Marie
|
|
Worker Member:
|
Mr Bell
|
SUBJECT:
1. Appeal of Adjudication Officer Decision No(s) ADJ-00021483 CA-00027723-006. BACKGROUND: 2. The Worker appealed the Decision of the Adjudication Officer to the Labour Court on 25 November 2019 in accordance with Section 8(A) of the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977 to 2015. A Labour Court hearing took place on 2 November 2021. The following is the Determination of the Court:- DETERMINATION : Introduction This is an appeal by Frederick Kidney (the Complainant) against the Adjudication Officer’s Decision ADJ-00021483 in his complaint of Unfair Dismissal against his previous employer Flannery’s Bar Ltd (the Respondent). The complaint was made pursuant to the Unfair Dismissals Acts 1977 to 2015 (the Acts). The Adjudication Officer found that the complaint was not well-founded. Background The Complainant was employed with the Respondent as a Part-time Chef at the Respondent’s business from 9th May 2018 to the 14th March 2019. The Complainant lodged his complaint of Unfair Dismissal along with a number of other claims with the WRC on the 12th April 2019. Respondent’s submission The Respondent submitted that as the Complainant did not have twelve months service as required by section 2 (1) (a) of the Acts the Court does not have jurisdiction to hear this case. Complainant’s case At the commencement of the hearing the Complainant confirmed that contrary to the requirements of section 2 (1) (a) he only had ten months service with the Respondent and that he did not have twelve months service. The Complainant did not seek to rely on one of the exceptions set out in section 6 (2) of the Act. Decision On the basis that the Complainant does not meet the requirements of section 2(1) (a) of the Act or fall within one of the exemptions to that requirement, the Court determines that the complaint - must fail. The decision of the Adjudication Officer is upheld. The Court so determines.
|

|
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
|
|

|
|
|

|
Louise O'Donnell
|
|
TH
|
______________________
|
|
22 November 2021
|
Deputy Chairman
|
NOTE Enquiries concerning this Determination should be addressed to Therese Hickey, Court Secretary.
|