| PW/24/49 |
DECISION NO. PWD2461
|
SECTION 44, WORKPLACE RELATIONS ACT 2015
PAYMENT OF WAGES ACT 1991
PARTIES:
(REPRESENTED BY IBEC)
AND
AUDREY SUMAILI
DIVISION:
| Chairman: | Mr Haugh |
| Employer Member: | Ms Doyle |
| Worker Member: | Ms Treacy |
SUBJECT:
Appeal of Adjudication Officer Decision No's: ADJ-00046539 (CA-000057362-006)
BACKGROUND:
This is an appeal of an Adjudication Officer’s Decision made pursuant to the Payment of Wages Act, 1991. The appeal was heard by the Labour Court in accordance with Section 44 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015.
The following is the Court's Decision.
DECISION:
Background to the Appeal
This is an appeal by Ms Audrey Sumaili (‘the Complainant’) from a decision of an Adjudication Officer (ADJ-00046539/CA-00057362-006, dated 26 March 2024) under the Payment of Wages Act 1991 (‘the Act’). The Complainant’s Notice of Appeal was received in the Court on 6 April 2024. The Court heard the appeal in Sligo on 23 October 2024.
The Adjudication Officer held that the Complainant’s complainant in respect of unpaid salary in the amount of €2,184.00, as referred to the Commission on 13 September 2023, was well-founded. In any event, this complaint was not contested and was conceded by Abtran Unlimited (‘the Respondent’) at the first-instance hearing.
Discussion and Decision
The Complainant is seeking to enlarge her claim under the Act in this appeal. The Court’s jurisdiction is to determine on a de novo basis complaints decided at first instance by an Adjudication Officer of the Workplace Relations Commission. The Court does not have jurisdiction to consider a complaint that was not decided by an Adjudication Officer. Were it to do so, it would be purporting to exercise a first-instance jurisdiction not bestowed upon it by the Oireachtas.
In seeking to enlarge her complainant under the Act in bringing this appeal, the Complainant is effectively asking the Court to determine a different complaint to that which was before the Adjudication Officer under the Act. For the reasons set out in the previous paragraph, it is apparent that the Court must decline jurisdiction in this matter.
The appeal, therefore, fails and the decision of the Adjudication Officer is upheld.
The Court so decides.
 |
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court |
|
|
|
Alan Haugh |
| AR | ______________________ |
| 11th November 2024 | Deputy Chairman |
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Aidan Ralph, Court Secretary.