Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Timothy  Waterhouse

Six Star Hospitality Management Limited

Representatives

No Appearance by or on behalf of the Complainant at hearing

No Appearance by or on behalf of the Respondent at hearing.

Act

Complaint Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977

CA-00070248-001

25/03/2025

On 25 March 2025, the Complainant, an Australian national submitted a complaint of unfair dismissal in respect of his tenure as vice President of an area of the Respondent business.

He wrote and submitted that he had been employed on a 40-hr. week from March 2021 to 27 February 2025. He stated that he was a remote work paid in Thai baht currency. He submitted an ambiguous address which incorporated Cork but reflected an alternative setting. The Respondent was introduced as having a Cork address.

He sought the remedy of compensation and omitted to detail if he had found new work post termination.

The Complainant chose to forward a large dossier of emails with this complaint form. These were not chronicled, nor were they requested by the WRC.

On 2 April 2025, the Complainant sought to pause his complaint before the WRC.

He did not engage with the WRC response which followed on the very same day.

Further to the Supreme Court judgment Zalewski [2021] IESC 24 the WRC can no longer guarantee hearings will be in private or that decisions would be anonymised. 

The complaint application has undergone validation checks, and the following issues have arisen.  The complaint cannot be further processed until these issues have been addressed/ clarified in writing. Your original complaint and any associated documentation are attached.

Please note there are no procedures at the Workplace Relations Commission to “Pause” a complaint. Should you wish to withdraw your complaint, the Workplace Relations Commission will have no further jurisdiction in the matter.

Please confirm the withdrawal of your complaint or the case will proceed to adjudication.

If you wish to proceed with the presentation of your complaint application, please complete the details as noted above, and return to this office either by email to:  Submissions@workplacerelations.ieor by post to the address below.  Please ensure your CA Reference Number above is clearly indicated on all correspondence.

The WRC made repeated and strident attempts to notify the named respondent of all documentation received from the complainant. Five returns to sender responses were received back by the WRC.

During the period March 2025, date of complaint and 3 February 2026, notification of hearing, the complainant made unsolicited submissions to the WRC which co incided with his apparent attempts to recoup salary in a parallel action.

These were added to the file.

Both Parties were invited to attend an in person hearing scheduled for 30 March 2026 at 12 noon in Cork.

In or around 12 February 2025, the Complainant contacted the scheduling dept of the WRC seeking remote access to his hearing.

As I had concerned at the ambiguities contained on the complaint form on stated domicile, I wrote the following letter to the complainant, which was forwarded to his email on consent.

I am the Adjudicator assigned to hear this case at hearing on March 30 next in Cork.

I have been requested if this case can be heard remotely by our Scheduling team. I have serious concerns at the frailty of detail on file for both parties and anticipate that jurisdictional issues may emerge if these are not clarified as best possible, prehearing.

I have raised a number of issues for your immediate attention please.

1 Your complaint form to WRC of 25 March 2025

Title Mr First name Timothy Surname Waterhouse

(Domestic Details mentioned, not reflected here)

 Nationality: Australian Position Held: VP Business Development and Operations Asia

This places both your home address and company address as Cork, Ireland.

Can I request that you respond to this please by providing your Irish post code for these addresses.

2 The Respondent has not received any of the WRC correspondence issued to the business address as everything has been returned “Returned to sender “

Please provide an updated business address for the named respondent within Ireland.

3 To date the file in support of your claim for unfair dismissal is a dossier of emails. I have no sense of the chronology of your claim   for statutory unfair dismissal under Irish Law.

I am to request that you provide an outline written submission with relevant employment documentation which demonstrates that you were employed by your named respondent in Ireland.

Please submit a contract, pay slips, Irish Revenue details, Irish Social Insurance details as pertaining to the named Respondent.

Once I have received a chronological submission, and updated address for mail purposes for the respondent, I will give further consideration for a request for a remote hearing.

I am keen to bring this case to hearing, but at present, the Respondent appears not to be on notice of your claim.

I do not have sufficient information to date and would welcome your cooperation in that regard, please.

If you have changed your own mail address, I would be grateful if you could alert pru@workplacerelations.ie with any changes .

I await your response within 14 days.

Yours sincerely,

Adjudicator

This letter did not generate a response.

I proceeded to hearing on March 30, 2026, at 12 noon. There was no appearance by either party at hearing. There was no reason offered for these non-appearances.

I have waited 5 days to allow for any untoward event which may have impacted on either party. I have not heard anything further.

The Complainant submitted a complaint of constructive dismissal. He outlined that he was based in Thailand and his wage had been processed first by a Global HR Company and then by bank transfer.

He worked as a Vice President of Business Development from February 2021 to February 2025. His resignation was prompted by a break down in his contractual terms and an unstable workplace.

He referred to his receiving a Thai work permit in 2023 and was paid in Thai baht 160,000 per week.

The Complainant submitted that he sought the remedy of compensation in respect of his constructive dismissal.

He did not respond to any of the repeated efforts to secure a properly compiled written submission, preferring instead to send in loose leafed uncoordinated emails.

I have not received any verifiable document which links the complainant to the employment detailed on the complaint form. I am left with a montage of uncoordinated documents.

The Complainant did not respond to my efforts to secure clarity on the ambiguities on his domicile and employment status.

The Complainant did not attend the hearing to open his case on March 30, 2026.

The Respondent has not engaged in this complaint by defence, submission or appearance. All correspondence prehearing was marked “return to sender “bar the notification of hearing sent on 3 February 2026.

There was no appearance by or on behalf of the Respondent at hearing.

I have been requested to make a decision in this claim for constructive dismissal.

In reaching my decision, I have read the in excess of 200 pages on file, all submitted by the complainant and none of which were co ordinated into a focussed submission to introduce me to the chronological lead into the case.

The Complainant did not engage with my efforts to try at least to unravel the clear ambiguities on the complaint form such a hybrid address in Thailand and Ireland.

As the parties are aware, I am limited to the provisions of the Irish Unfair Dismissals Act 1977 in reaching any decision

Section 1 of that Act provides a definition of dismissal. The complainant framed his complaint on Section 1(b), where the onus rests on him to prove his case.

“dismissal”, in relation to an employee, means—

(a) the termination by his employer of the employee’s contract of employment with the employer, whether prior notice of the termination was or was not given to the employee,

(b) the termination by the employee of his contract of employment with his employer, whether prior notice of the termination was or was not given to the employer, in circumstances in which, because of the conduct of the employer, the employee was or would have been entitled, or it was or would have been reasonable for the employee, to terminate the contract of employment without giving prior notice of the termination to the employer,

Neither party attended the hearing in this case.

Neither party pro-offered a reason for nonappearance.

The Complainant has clearly used the WRC as leverage in pursuance of his employment related issues from March 2025. He adopted the role of Asian based correspondent  rather than Domestic  litigant with the WRC. He but did not engage with any of our requests on

1 requested to elect if he wished to withdraw his claim, when he sought to pause the complaint, he had made a week previously.

2 February 2026 request for clarification on clear ambiguities on the complaint form.

3 WRC request for written submission.

The WRC is a Statutory Body. I refer to the October 2025 helpful guidelines to parties.

30 October 2025 WRC PROCEDURES IN THE ADJUDICATION AND INVESTIGATION OF ALL EMPLOYMENT AND EQUALITY COMPLAINTS AND DISPUTES

 Background: These procedures set out, for parties to complaints/disputes1 and their representatives, the normal working practice of the Workplace Relations Commission (the “WRC”) and the requirements with which the parties should comply. These procedures take into account inter alia the Workplace Relations (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2021 (the “WRA 2021”) 2 and the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2020 (the “CLCLA 2020”).3 These procedures are not intended to be exhaustive, nor are they intended to provide a legal interpretation of the legislation which falls within the remit of the WRC. Further information on individual Acts is available from www.workplacerelations.ie. The WRC reserves the right to vary these procedures generally and, as appropriate, in the circumstances of the individual case where required in light of fair procedures. It is incumbent on all parties to adhere to these procedures to the best of their ability and failure to do so may have implications for the processing or defence of the complaint.

These guidelines are augmented by tailored guidelines for Adjudication cases, Lay Litigants, Evidence at hearing and much more. The WRC has at its objective to administer justice in a timely manner to the parties who present before it.

The Complainant has not appeared to open his case. He has not given evidence. He has not given any reason for this omission. I find his approach unreasonable. This had led me to consider a rare application of Section 8 (C) (1) of the Act.

Striking out of claims that are not pursued

8C. (1) Where a claim for redress under this Act is referred to the Director General under section 8, the Director General may strike out the claim if he or she is satisfied that the claim has not been pursued by the employee during the period of one year (or such other period as may be prescribed by regulations made by the Minister) immediately preceding its being struck out.

(2) The Director General shall, as soon as may be after he or she strikes out a claim for redress under this Act in accordance with this section, notify the parties to the claim in writing of the striking out of the claim.

(3) Where a claim for redress under this Act is struck out under this section, the employee who brought the claim shall not be entitled to prosecute the claim any further.

The instant claim has not been pursued by the complainant during the period of one year from 25 March 2025.

I find I must strike out the claim as having not been pursued, by application of Section 8(C) (1) of the 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.

The claim for unfair dismissal is hereby struck out in accordance with Section 8(C) (1) of the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977 -2015.

Strike out of claim. Section 8.