DWT2542

PARTIES:

DIVISION:

SUBJECT:

Appeal of Adjudication Officer Decision No's: ADJ-00052936 (CA-00064759-001)

BACKGROUND:

The Worker appealed the Decision of the Adjudication Officer to the Labour Court on 16 December 2024 in accordance with Section 28(1) of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997. A Labour Court hearing took place on 3 September 2025.

The following is the Decision of the Court:

DETERMINATION:

1 Background

The Complainant lodged her complaint with the WRC on 14 July 2024 under the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997.  The Adjudication Officer issued a decision in respect of her complaint and upheld one element of the complaint for which she awarded €650 compensation.  The decision was issued on 29 October 2024. The Complainant appealed the decision on 16 December 2024 which was outside of the statutory time limit. 

This matter comes before the Court by way of a preliminary application by the Complainant relating to the time limit set out in the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 (the Act) at Section 44(3) as regards the making of an appeal against the decision of an Adjudication Officer. The Act at Section 44(2), (3) and (4) provides as follows:

(2) An appeal under this section shall be initiated by the party concerned giving a notice in writing to the Labour Court containing such particulars as are determined by the Labour Court in accordance with rules under subsection (5) of section 20 of the Act of 1946 and stating that the party concerned is appealing the decision to which it relates.

(3) Subject to subsection (4) , a notice under subsection (2) shall be given to the Labour Court not later than 42 days from the date of the decision concerned.

(4) The Labour Court may direct that a notice under subsection (2) may be given to it after the expiration of the period specified in subsection (3) if it is satisfied that the notice was not so given before such expiration due to the existence of exceptional circumstances.

In the within case the Adjudication Officer made a decision in relation to the complaint of the Complainant under the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997on 29 October 2024. An appeal against that decision, were it to be made within the time limit specified at Section 44(3) of the Act, would require to be made no later than 9 December 2024. The appeal was received by this Court on 16 December 2024.

The Complainant seeks to have the Court direct, in accordance with Section 44(4) of the Act that the notice of appeal may be given to it after the expiration of the period specified in Section 44(3) of the Act.

Position of the parties

The Complainant contends that exceptional circumstances can be demonstrated in the within appeal and that the Court consequently has the discretion to allow the within appeal to progress.

The Complainant set out the relevant circumstances applying as follows. I am self- representing in this matter and navigating the complexities of employment law without legal aid. Compiling the necessary evidence and understanding of the procedural requirements has been a time-intensive process, further exacerbated by the emotional and financial toll of prolonged underpayments and retaliatory dismissal. These challenges delayed my submission, but I have worked diligently to ensure that this appeal comprehensively addresses the key issues. I respectfully request that the Labour Court accept my late appeal under section 44 (4) of the Workplace Relations Act ,2015, given the exceptional circumstances.

The Respondent contends that no exceptional circumstances applied which prevented the Appellant from giving notice to the Court of her appeal within the time limits allowed under the Act. The Respondent submitted that the fact that the Complainant is a lay litigant is neither exceptional nor, of itself, does it constitute exceptional circumstances. Writing the submission is not required prior to making the appeal.        The legislation clearly sets out that the appeal must be received by the Court within 42 days and in this case that did not happen.

Discussion and conclusions.

It is settled law that in order to consider an appeal of this nature the Court must first be satisfied that exceptional circumstances were in existence during the period for the giving of an appeal notice to the Court and the Court must also be satisfied that the exceptional circumstances applying prevented the giving of a notice of an appeal to the Court.

The Court addressed the issue of exceptional circumstances in its decision, albeit in a case under a different statute, in Gaelscoil Thulach na nOg and Joyce Fitzimons-Markey (EET034) as follows

The Court must first consider if the circumstances relied upon by the applicant can be regarded as exceptional. If it answers that question in the affirmative the Court must then go on to consider if those circumstances operated so as to prevent the applicant from lodging her claim in time.

The term exceptional is an ordinary familiar English adjective and not a term of art. It describes a circumstance which is such as to form an exception, which is out of the ordinary course or unusual or special or uncommon. To be exceptional a circumstance need not be unique or unprecedented or very rare; but it cannot be one which is regular or routinely or normally encountered.

The burden of proof in establishing the existence of exceptional circumstances rests with the Complainant in this case. To discharge that burden the Complainant must present clear and cogent evidence to support the contention that exceptional circumstances within the meaning of Section 44(4) of the Act of 2015 exist and that those circumstances acted so as to prevent the applicant from lodging his appeal in time.

The Court accepts that the facts of any case are unique to itself and that the application of the law to the within case must be in the context of the circumstances arising in this case

In the within case the Complainant contends that she is a lay litigant and that she had to put a lot of work into her submissions. The question for the Court is whether these circumstances were exceptional. The Court cannot accept that these circumstances in and of themselves are exceptional to the extent that they prevented the Complainant lodging her appeal in time. The submission is not required at the time of the making of an appeal, all that is required is the completion of a form and attaching a copy of the Adjudication Officer’s decision.   The fact that the Complainant is a lay litigant is not exceptional.

Determination

The Court determines that the within appeal was not made within the time limit set down in the Act at Section 44(4) and consequently the Court does not have jurisdiction to hear the appeal.

The Court so determines.

	Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
	Louise O'Donnell
CC	______________________
6 October 2025	Deputy Chairman

NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Ms Ceola Cronin, Court Secretary.