ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00053555
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | A Schoolteacher | A Primary School |
Representatives | Did not attend and was not represented | Mason Hayes & Curran LLP Mason Hayes & Curran LLP |
Complaint(s):
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-00065408-001 | 13/08/2024 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 06/05/2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Donal Moore
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 – 2015 following 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.
There was no attendance by or on behalf of the Complainant at the hearing.
Background:
The hearing was attended by a Barrister and Solicitor for the Respondent, the Principal and Chair of the Board. The Complainant did not attend, was not represented and at the time of the closing of the hearing had not provided any explanation or reasonable excuse for their absence. No evidence was required and no oath or affirmation was made Having tried to contact the Complainant by phone with no answer and waiting the customary 20 minutes for an appearance, I heard from the Respondent who requested a dismissal of the case. The Hearing was formally closed. I reserved my decision on that matter in case a reasonable excuse was given for the nonattendance. In response to efforts on the part of the Case Officer, the Complainant contacted the Commission later in the day after the hearing was closed saying that she had forgotten the hearing due to the nature of her involvement in other legal matters at the heart of this issue. She asked for a postponement which she followed up with a formal postponement application to the Commission. It should be noted that postponements can not be given on the day of hearing, and it would be necessary for the Complainant or her representative to present to the hearing and request an adjournment. The matter of seeking an adjournment was to be based on her right to silence regarding an appeal of criminal matter the circumstances of which are pertinent to the matter of the hearing. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant did not appear and was not represented. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
Without the need to go into evidence the Respondent submitted that the matter be dismissed on the non-appearance of the Complainant. An ancillary point was made that the incorrect respondent was named by the Complainant. |
Findings and Conclusions:
I have chosen to anonymise the parties to the decision due to the nature of the complaint arising from an issue with minors. The Complainant did not appear and did not offer a satisfactory reason for not attending and I am satisfied that the Complainant was on proper notice. As the Complainant was not present to move the complaint and in the context that I am satisfied that the said Complainant was informed of the arrangements for the hearing and in the absence of any reasonable explanation for non-attendance, I must conclude that the within complaint is not well-founded and I decide accordingly. |
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.
For the reasons set out above I have decided that the complaint is not well-founded |
Dated: 06th of June 2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Donal Moore
Key Words:
Non-appearance, criminal matters |