ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00053058
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Eamonn Keaney | Steve Noone T/A Steve Noone Landscaping |
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | {text} | {text} |
Representatives | Conor Maguire Conor A. Maguire Solictors | David Kearney HR Brief |
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-00064893-001 | 22/07/2024 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00064893-002 | 22/07/2024 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 15/04/2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Emer O'Shea
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and/or Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 - 2015, and/or Section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997 following the referral of the complaint(s)/dispute(s) to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint(s)/dispute(s) and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint(s)/dispute(s).
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The claimant did not attend and was not represented at the hearing |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The respondent’s party attended and was represented by David Kearney HR Brief Ltd. He was accompanied by the respondent Mr.Steve Noone and Mr.Sean Dunne who were available to give evidence. Mr.Kearney furnished a submission on behalf of the respondent |
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint(s)/dispute(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 am satisfied that the claimant was duly notified of the date time and place at which the hearing to investigate the complaint would be held. The claimant did not attend and no application for a postponement was submitted in the weeks preceding the hearing. In these circumstances and in the absence of any evidence to the contrary having been adduced before me, I must conclude that the within complaint is not well founded and I decide accordingly.
Section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under section 9 of that Act.
I am satisfied that the claimant was duly notified of the date time and place at which the hearing to investigate the complaint would be held. The claimant did not attend and no application for a postponement was submitted in the weeks preceding the hearing. In these circumstances and in the absence of any evidence to the contrary having been adduced before me, I must conclude that the within complaint is not well founded and I decide accordingly.
The complaints fail for lack of prosecution . |
Dated: 8th May 2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Emer O'Shea
Key Words:
|