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

TUD264

null

TU/25/13

DECISION  NO.  TUD264

SECTION 44, WORKPLACE RELATIONS ACT 2015

SECTION 11 (1), EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES (PROTECTION OF EMPLOYEES ON TRANSFER OF UNDERTAKINGS) REGULATION, 2003


PARTIES:

CAIRDE CREDIT UNION LTD

(REPRESENTED BY CATHAL MCGREAL BL, INSTRUCTED BY MASON HAYES & CURRAN)

AND

KATHY COLEMAN

(REPRESENTED BY SHAUN BOYLAN BL, INSTRUCTED BY SEAN ORMONDE & CO SOLICITORS)



DIVISION:

Chairman: Mr Haugh
Employer Member: Mr O'Brien
Worker Member: Mr Bell



SUBJECT:

Appeal of Adjudication Officer Decision No's: ADJ-00054649 (CA-00066735-002)

BACKGROUND:

The Employer appealed the Decision of the Adjudication Officer to the Labour Court under the European Communities (Protection of Employees on Transfer of Undertakings) Regulations 2003 (‘the Regulations’) on 9 June 2025.

A Labour Court hearing took place on 2 April 2026. 

The following is the Decision of the Court.

DECISION:

Background to the Appeal

This is an appeal on behalf of Cairde Credit Union (‘the Respondent’) from a decision of an Adjudication Officer (ADJ-000546649/CA-00066735-002, dated 1 May 2025) under the European Communities (Protection of Employees on Transfer of Undertakings) Regulations 2003 (‘the Regulations’). The Adjudication Officer upheld Ms Kathy Coleman’s (‘the Complainant’) complaint under Regulation 4 of the Regulations but made no award of compensation.

The Respondent’s Notice of Appeal was received in the Court on 9 June 2025. The Court sat in Waterford on 2 April 2026 to hear the appeal.

 

Settlement

The Court was informed at the outset of the scheduled hearing of the within appeal by Counsel that the matter had been compromised and that it was the parties’ intention to formalise their agreement in writing. A term of the Parties’ agreement was that the Respondent’s appeal would be allowed. The Court granted the Parties a specified period of time for implementation and was subsequently informed that the agreement had been fully executed.

Decision

The Court, therefore, having regard to the mutually agreed position of the Parties, finds in the Respondent’s favour and directs that the decision of the Adjudication Officer be set aside.

The Court so decides.

Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Alan Haugh
AM ______________________
29/06/2026 Deputy Chairman



NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Ms Áine Maunsell, Court Secretary.