ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00053077
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Dorin Burlacu | James White & Company Unlimited Company (Amended on consent) |
Representatives | Self-Represented | Campbell International Human Resource Consultants |
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-00064898 | 22 July 2024 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 16/12/2024
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Úna Glazier-Farmer
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 – 2015following 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.
Background:
The Complainant gave evidence on affirmation. The Complainant’s wife and fellow employee, Konsuela Daradics of the Complainant also gave evidence on affirmation.
The Respondent was represented at the hearing. Ms Megan White, the General Manager, swore an affirmation. Olivia Bane, who performed an HR function within the Respondent, swore an affirmation. Nnabuike Nneji swore an affirmation, as did Jose Menezes. The correct the name of the Respondent Company was clarified at the outset of the hearing. The date the Complainant commenced employment was 28 November 2023 as per the contract of employment. The complaint was heard together with ADJ-00052882.
At the outset of the hearing, the hearing the parties were taken through the Complaint Form in detail. Both the Complaint Form in this complaint and ADJ-00052882 were opened. The Complainant was asked by the Adjudication Officer if he wished to proceed with both complaints in the circumstances where they both related to complaints of unfair dismissal with ADJ-00052882 being received on 10 July 2024 and this complaint received by the WRC on 22 July 2024. The Complainant, who was self-represented, despite stating he had sought legal advice from a Solicitor in Ennis previously, explained he was unsure of the process. It was again explained in detail to him the difference in the two complaints, the first ADJ-00052882 was for constructive dismissal compared to this complaint which was for unfair dismissal, but both were referred under the same legislation. The Respondent was asked for its view, in the interest of fairness. It was submitted that the complaint, ADJ-00052882, was first in time and should be dealt with. It was submitted two complaints with the same set of facts under the same act could not be dealt with together. The Complainant was given a third opportunity to respond after the question was put to him again and differences outlined. It was the Complainant’s sworn evidence that he wished to proceed with the complaint ADJ-00052882 received on 10 July 2024 and withdraw the duplicate complaint, ADJ-00053077 received on 22 July 2024, i.e. this complaint. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant withdrew the complaint at the hearing. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The complaint was withdrawn at the hearing. |
Findings and Conclusions:
The Complainant decided himself to withdraw this complaint at the hearing after been given every opportunity to consider it. |
Decision:
Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 – 2015 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.
The complaint was withdrawn at the hearing. |
Dated: 11th April 2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Úna Glazier-Farmer
Key Words:
Unfair Dismissal – Duplicate Complaint |