ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00056229
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Robert Arazny | P & N Foran Engineering Limited |
Representatives | No Appearance | Michael Maher |
Complaint:
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-00067375-001 | 14/11/2024 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 16/09/2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Christina Ryan
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967 (as amended) following the referral of the complaint to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint.
This matter was heard by way of a remote hearing on the 16th September 2025 pursuant to the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2020 and S.I. 359/2020, which designated the WRC as a body empowered to hold remote hearings.
I received and reviewed documentation from the Complainant and the Respondent prior to the hearing.
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant did not attend the scheduled hearing of this complaint on the 16th September 2025. Notice of the remote hearing arrangements was sent to the Complainant on the 30th July 2025. The Webex link for the hearing was emailed to the Complainant on the 15th September 2025. The Complainant emailed the WRC prior to the hearing on the 16th September 2025 to advise that he would not be in attendance at the hearing. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent submitted a full defence to the Complainant’s complaint and attended the hearing and was prepared to present evidence. |
Findings and Conclusions:
A complaint pursuant to the Redundancy Payments Act 1967 (as amended) was received by the WRC on the 14th November 2024. The complaint was referred to me for investigation. A hearing for that purpose was scheduled for the 11th April 2025. The Complainant and the Respondent were in attendance however no evidence was heard on that date and the matter was rescheduled for hearing. The matter was scheduled for hearing on the 16th September 2025. The Complainant emailed the WRC on the morning of the hearing to advise that he was not in a position to attend the hearing due to work commitments. He apologised for his non-attendance and requested that his complaint be considered on the documentation furnished by him to the WRC. He did not apply for a postponement. I verified that the Complainant was on notice of the date, time and venue of the hearing and waited some time to accommodate a late arrival in the event that his circumstances had changed. The Respondent was in attendance at the time the hearing was to commence. In the circumstances and in the absence of direct evidence, I must conclude that the complaint is not well-founded. |
Decision:
Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967 (as amended) requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under that Act.
For the reasons given above, I find that the complaint is not well-founded and I decide accordingly. |
Dated: 18-09-2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Christina Ryan
Key Words:
|