MN/24/8 | DECISION NO. MND257 |
SECTION 44, WORKPLACE RELATIONS ACT 2015
MINIMUM NOTICE AND TERMS OF EMPLOYMENT ACTS, 1973 TO 2005
PARTIES:
HYPH IRELAND LIMITED
(REPRESENTED BY MARY PAULA GUINNESS BL,INSTRUCTED BY WHITNEY MOORE LLP)
AND
MICHAEL KIELY
(REPRESENTED BY JASON MURRAY BL INSTRUCTED BY O'MARA GERAGHTY MCCOURT)
DIVISION:
Chairman: | Ms Connolly |
Employer Member: | Ms Doyle |
Worker Member: | Ms Hannick |
SUBJECT:
Appeal of Adjudication Officer Decision No's: ADJ-00037708 (CA-00048926-002)
BACKGROUND:
The Employer appealed the Decision of the Adjudication Officer to the Labour Court on 28 March 2024 in accordance with Section 44 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015.
A Labour Court hearing took place on 11 June 2025.
The following is the Decision of the Court.
DECISION:
This is an appeal by HYPH Ireland Limited a decision of an Adjudicator Officer (ADJ-00037708, CA-00048926-002, dated 21 February 2024) under the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Acts, 1973 to 2005 (the Acts) in a claim made by Michael Kiely against his former employer.
The Adjudication Officer found that the complaint was well founded and awarded compensation of €24,000.
For ease of reference the parties are given the same designation as they had at first instance. Hence Michael Kiely is referred to as “the Complainant” and HYPH Ireland Limited is referred to as “the Respondent”.
A Labour Court hearing of this appeal was held on the same day as a hearing of linked appeal by the Respondent (UDD2533). In that Decision, under the Unfair Dismissals Acts, the Court found that the dismissal of the Complainant was unfair.
1. Position of the Respondent
The Respondent conceded the complaint.
- Position of the Complainant
The Complainant commenced employment on 20 June 2013. His employment was unfairly terminated by the Respondent on 19 November 2021. He was dismissed without notice and was not paid any amount for his statutory notice period. He is entitled to six weeks’ notice as provided in his contract of employment.
- Relevant Law
Minimum period of notice.
4.—(1) An employer shall, in order to terminate the contract of employment of an employee who has been in his continuous service for a period of thirteen weeks or more, give to that employee a minimum period of notice calculated in accordance with the provisions of subsection (2) of this section.
(2) The minimum notice to be given by an employer to terminate the contract of employment of his employee shall be—
(a) if the employee has been in the continuous service of his employer for less than two years, one week,
(b) if the employee has been in the continuous service of his employer for two years or more, but less than five years, two weeks,
(c) if the employee has been in the continuous service of his employer for five years or more, but less than ten years, four weeks,
(d) if the employee has been in the continuous service of his employer for ten years or more, but less than fifteen years, six weeks,
(e) if the employee has been in the continuous service of his employer for fifteen years or more, eight weeks.
(3) The provisions of the First Schedule to this Act shall apply for the purposes of ascertaining the period of service of an employee and whether that service has been continuous.
(4) The Minister may by order vary the minimum period of notice specified in subsection (2) of this section.
(5) Any provision in a contract of employment, whether made before or after the commencement of this Act, which provides for a period of notice which is less than the period of notice specified in subsection (2) of this section, shall have effect as if that contract provided for a period of notice in accordance with this section.
(6) The Minister may by order amend or revoke an order under this section including this subsection. 12. (1) A decision of an adjudication officer under section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 in relation to a complaint of a contravention of section 4(2) or 5 may, where the adjudication officer finds that that section was contravened by the employer in relation to the employee who presented the complaint, include a direction that the employer concerned pay to the employee compensation for any loss sustained by the employee by reason of the contravention.
- Deliberations and Findings
This case is linked to UDD2533 where the Court determined that the decision to dismiss the Complainant from his employment on 19 November 2021 was unfair.
The information supplied to the Court was that the Complainant commenced employment with the Respondent on June 2013 and that his employment ended on 19 November 2021.
Accordingly, the Court finds that the Complainant has a statutory entitlement in accordance with the Act to four weeks paid notice.
In UDD2533, the Court found that the Complainant fortnightly salary was $14,769.23 per fortnight, which amounts to a weekly payment of $7,384.62. He is therefore due 4 weeks’ pay of $29,538.46 ($7,384.62 x4).
At the hearing the parties agreed to the Court’s calculating the amount of compensation in euro by reference to the exchange rate at the start of June 2025. The conversion rate from euro to dollars on the 2 June 2025 was 1 US Dollar - 0.87 Euro.
That being to case the Court decides that the amount of compensation due in this case is €25,698.46 ($29,538.46 x 0.87).
- Determination
The Complainant is well founded.
The Court directs the Respondent to pay the Complainant €25,698.46.
The Decision of the Adjudication Officer is varied accordingly.
The Court so determines.
![]() | Signed on behalf of the Labour Court |
![]() | |
![]() | Katie Connolly |
AM | ______________________ |
11 September 2025 | Deputy Chairman |
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Ms Áine Maunsell, Court Secretary.