ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00061829
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Giorgi Karanaia | Hallquar Engineering Services Ltd, trading as Enexiv |
Complaint:
Act | Complaint Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 | CA-00075491-001 | 17/09/2025 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 25/03/2026
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Pat Brady
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 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.
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The complainant gave evidence on affirmation.
He says that he has been working for the respondent, Enexiv Ltd (via HES) since June 2024. He repeatedly requested to be moved from self- employed (No-PAYE) to employee (PAYE) status, and provided all required documents on May 30th, and June 3rd, 2025.
He submits that the respondent failed to implement this change.
Despite confirming verbally and in writing that he wished to become PAYE, he continued to be paid as self-employed. This resulted in a denial of his legal entitlements including, paid annual leave (holiday pay), Public holiday pay and written terms and conditions of employment.
On one occasion he was approached by an employee of the respondent about the possibility of becoming an employee of its company, but he confirmed that nothing had come of this. He was also asked for confirmation of his employment permit status by the respondent.
He was directed on a daily basis in relation to his work by employees of the respondent.
This complaint is being made to the WRC to address misclassification of his employment, recover outstanding holiday and public holiday pay, and secure proper PAYE status with full entitlements going forward. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
Hallquar Engineering Services Ltd, trading as Enexiv, is a group of companies engaged in engineering, and construction in the private infrastructure, and resources and energy sectors, providing skilled labour, using direct employees and sub-contractors. Uponreceivingnotificationof this complaintfromWRConSeptember 26th, 2025, the respondent confirmed that the complainant was not an employee. Mr. Derek Daly, Financial Controller, gave evidence on affirmation Mr.KaraniaholdsacontractualarrangementwithEnaghContractsLtd, a third party company,sinceJuly 2024.Hehasprovidedevidenceconfirmingthathehasacontractual arrangementwithEnagh,whichremainsinplacetodate.The respondentengagessubcontractlabourthroughEnaghContractsLimited, withwhomwehaveaservicecontract.
Because of this, at no time has Hallquar Engineering Services Ltd provided him with a contract of employment or employment-related documentation. He has never been on the respondent’s payroll, nor issued with a staff handbook nor required to submit annual leave request forms or other internal HR documentation that would normally apply to employees.
In accordancewithcompliancerequirements, allpersonnelattendingthesite,includingsubcontractorpersonnel,arerequiredto providevaliddocumentationconfirmingtheiridentity,righttoworkandpermissionto resideinIreland,includingavalidTemporaryResidenceCertificate(TRC)andrightto work(LMAU)whereapplicable.
These checks form part of routine health and safety compliance procedures, with periodic site audits carried out to ensure that all personnel working on site meet legal and safety requirements. These checks are part of standard health and safety procedures and are not related to the complainant’s engagement with the WRC. As part of our site compliance requirements, we must ensure that all personnel working on site have valid documentation confirming their right to work and reside in Ireland. At present, we have not received confirmation if Mr. Karania’s has been granted permission to reside.
Workonsiteisallocated,supervisedandmonitoredsolelybytheprincipalcontractor onsite.AsHallquaris asub-contractoronsite,theprincipalcontractorproduces theweekly timesheetssignedonsitebytheclient.Hallquarinvoicesthemaincontractorforhoursworked,andEnaghContractsinvoicesHallquarforthelabourprovidedbyMrKaranaia. EnaghContractsLimitedispaidbyHallquarEngineeringServicesLimitedonaweekly basisinlinewiththoseinvoices. In January 2025,Mr. Karania enquired as to whether there were any positions available with Hallquar. George informed him that a position was available. Mr. Karanaia initially indicated that he would terminate his contractual arrangement with Enagh Contracts Limited and commence work with Hallquar Engineering Services Ltd. However,on23/02/2026,Mr.Karaniaconfirmedthathewishedtoremainunderhis existingcontractualarrangementwithEnaghContractsLimitedandcontinuetobe paid by them. |
Findings and Conclusions:
On the basis of the evidence of the parties set out above it is clear that the complainant is not and never has been an employee of the respondent.
There is only the flimsiest case made out based on a conversation about the possibility of him becoming an employee but from which nothing materialised. This is so many stages removed from a contract of employment as to be irrelevant.
Accordingly, the complaint is entirely misconceived and is not well founded. He is not entitled to a statement of his Terms of Employment from this respondent. |
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.
For the reasons set out above Complaint CA-00075491-001 is not well founded. |
Dated: 10-04-26
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Pat Brady
Key Words:
Employment Status |
