ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00052840
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Róisín Bohan | South Dublin Auction Core Auction Ventures Limited |
Representatives | Mr Eoin Morris BL instructed by Crushell & Co Solicitors | Mr Paul McDonald, Solicitor; AJP Mc Donald Solicitors |
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-00064740-001 | 12/07/2024 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 | CA-00064740-002 | 12/07/2024 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00064740-003 | 12/07/2024 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 30/04/2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Jim Dolan
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 & Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 - 2015, following the referral of the complaint(s) to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint(s) and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint(s).
Background:
The complainant was employed by the respondent from 27th February 2023 until 15th March 2024. The complainant was employed as an office administrator. This complaint was received by the Workplace Relations Commission on 12th July 2024. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
At the hearing of this complaint the complainant’s solicitor and barrister were both in attendance however the complainant herself did not attend the hearing. When asked to provide an explanation for the non-attendance by the complainant her legal representative informed the hearing that communication with the complainant had proved impossible, despite the fact that many messages had been left for her there was no reply from the complainant. I am satisfied that the complainant was aware that the hearing was scheduled to take place on 30th April 2025. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The legal representative for the respondent was prepared to present a full defence against the complainant’s allegations. |
Findings and Conclusions:
A complaint was received by the Director General of the Workplace Relations Commission on 12th July 2024 alleging that her former employer’s (the Respondent) actions breached the following Acts: Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977; Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 and the Payment of Wages Act, 1991. The said complaint was referred to me for investigation. A hearing for that purpose was held on 30th April 2025. There was no appearance by the Complainant (I note that the complainant’s legal representatives did attend as scheduled) at the hearing. I am satisfied that the said Complainant was informed in writing of the date, time, and place at which the hearing to investigate the complaint would be held. In these circumstances and in the absence of any evidence to the contrary having been adduced before me, I must conclude that the within complaints are not well-founded and I decide accordingly. |
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint(s) in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.
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.
I must conclude that the within complaints are not well-founded and I decide accordingly. |
Dated: 09/05/2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Jim Dolan
Key Words:
|