ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION

Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00054119

Parties:

	Complainant	Respondent
Parties	Megan Clarke	Jayden & Preston

Representatives

Self Represented

Not present

Complaint(s):

Act	Complaint/Dispute Reference No.	Date of Receipt
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Act, 1967	CA-00066059-001	09/09/2024

Date of Adjudication Hearing: 20/10/2025

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Peter O'Brien

Procedure:

In accordance Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967 - 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).

This matter was heard by way of remote hearing pursuant to the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2020 and SI 359/20206, which designates the WRC as a body empowered to hold remote hearings. In deference to the Supreme Court ruling, Zalewski v Ireland and the WRC [2021] IESC 24 on the 6th of April 2021 the Parties were informed in advance that the Hearing would be in Public, Testimony under Oath or Affirmation would be required and full cross examination of all witnesses would be provided for. The Hearing too place completely in public and the required Affirmation / Oath was administered to all witnesses. The legal perils of committing Perjury were explained to all parties. Full cross examination of Witnesses was allowed.

Background:

The Complainant was employed as an Office Administrator. She received no notice of her employment terminating while she was on maternity leave when the business shut down in August 2023. The Complainant was not paid her statutory redundancy.

Summary of Complainant’s Case:

The Complainant was employed as an Office Administrator from 14/2/2018 to 18/8/2023 when the business suddenly closed. The Complainant was previously employed by Novapoint and transferred under TUPE to the Respondent, when that company was taken over by the Respondent.

The Complainant earned 580 Euros per week gross.

The Complainant did not receive any redundancy pay due to the closure of the business.

The Complainant had previously submitted an Unfair Dismissal claim (due to redundancy) and this was adjudicated upon by the WRC in her favour but the Complainant stated it would be too costly for her to enforce that decision through the Courts relative to the amount of redundancy pay involved. The Complainant advised she wished to try recover the redundancy due through the Redundancy Fund and required a decision under the Redundancy Payments Acts to do so.

Summary of Respondent’s Case:

A Complaint was received by the Director General of the Workplace Relations Commission by the Complainant on September 9th 2024 alleging that her former employer contravened the provisions of the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967-2020 in relation to her. The said complaint was referred to me for investigation. A Hearing for that purpose was held on October 20th 2025.There was no appearance by or on behalf of the Respondent at the Hearing. I am satisfied that the said Respondent was informed in writing of the date, time and place at which the Hearing to investigate the complaint would be held and were not present at the Hearing.

Findings:

This is a complaint under the Redundancy Payments Act, 1967, to the effect that the complainant was made redundant and did not receive a redundancy payment.

The Complainant advised the Hearing that the Respondent took over the company from Nova point around December 2022. The Complainant advised she was awarded the equivalent of her redundancy payment through a prior WRC decision under the Unfair Dismissal Acts (ADJ-49914) but that this was not paid to her and it would cost too much to pursue the award through the Courts. The Complainant confirmed she was not pursuing that award any further and confirmed she would not pursue it in the future on the basis her complaint under the Redundancy Payments Act was successful. I am satisfied to accept jurisdiction of this complaint on the basis of the Complainants commitments given to the Hearing.

The entitlement to a redundancy payment is set out in Section 7 of the Redundancy Payments Act, 1967 the relevant section states as follows:

(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), an employee who is dismissed shall be taken to be dismissed by reason of redundancy if for one or more reasons not related to the employee concerned the dismissal is attributable wholly or mainly to—

(a) the fact that his employer has ceased, or intends to cease, to carry on the business for the purposes of which the employee was employed by him, or has ceased or intends to cease, to carry on that business in the place where the employee was so employed, or

Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967 – 2020 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under that Act. Based on the uncontested evidence of the Complainant I allow the Complainants appeal and I award her statutory redundancy on the following basis Section 4.(1) of the Act states “Subject to this section and to section 47 this Act shall apply to employees employed in employment which is insurable for all benefits under the Social Welfare Acts, 1952 to 1966 and to employees who were so employed in such employment in the period of two years ending on the date of termination of employment.” Therefore, subject to the Complainant being in employment which was insurable for this purpose under the Social Welfare Acts, and subject to being confirmed by the appropriate Government Agency, the Complainant is entitled to a redundancy payment of two weeks per year (or part thereof) plus a week on the following basis;

Date of Commencement; February 14th 2018

Date of Reckonable Service for Redundancy Payment Ceasing on: August 18th 2023

Gross Weekly Wage: 580 Euros

The Complainants period of “Reckonable Service” is defined by Schedule 3 of the Act and does not include any period of absence from work due to lay off by the employer.

Decision:

Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967 – 2012 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under that Act.

I allow the Complaints Appeal.

Dated: 29-10-2025

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Peter O'Brien

Key Words:

Redundancy