PWD2620

PARTIES:

DIVISION:

SUBJECT:

Appeal of Adjudication Officer Decision No's: ADJ-00053174 (CA-00065000-004)

BACKGROUND:

This is an appeal of an Adjudication Officer’s Decision made pursuant to the Payment of Wages Act, 199. 

The appeal was heard by the Labour Court in accordance with Section 44 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 on 23 June 2026.

 The following is the Court's Decision:

DECISION:

Background to the Appeal

This is an appeal by Ms Lyu Lu from a decision of an Adjudication Officer (ADJ-00053174 CA-00065000-004, dated 11 March 2025) under the Payment of Wages Act 1991 (‘the Act’). Notice of Appeal was received in the Court on 1 April 2025. The Court heard the appeal in Cork on 23 June 2026.

Brief Factual Background

The Complainant was employed by Kildare Chilling Company from 23 March 2020 as an experienced Meat Processor Operative. Kildare Chilling Company was acquired by Dawn Meats Ireland Unlimited Company (‘the Respondent’) in September 2024. The Complainant was dismissed from her employment on 12 January 2024 and paid four weeks’ pay in lieu of notice. She availed herself of the appeals process which became quite protracted. The Complainant awaited the conclusion of the internal appeals process in July 2024 before referring the within complaint to the Workplace Relations Commission on 26 July 2024.

The Complaint

The Complainant submits that she was not paid any wages in the period between 12 January 2024 (the date on which was notified of the Respondent’s decision to terminate her employment) and the date of the outcome of her appeal from that decision. The thrust of her submission is that, in her opinion, she continued to be an employee until her appeal had been determined in July 2024.

The Law

The established jurisprudence in relation to when a dismissal ordinarily takes effect is succinctly and accurately summarised in paragraph [22.69] of Redmond on Dismissal Law (Third Edition) where Dr Ryan, commenting on the determination of the Employment Appeals Tribunal in O’Neill v Bank of Ireland [1993] ELR 145 states:

“The case highlights an important issue which should not remain opaque in disciplinary procedures. Where an internal or external appeal is provided, there should be no doubt as to whether the contract is saved in all the circumstances pending conclusion of the appeal. In O’Neill, the EAT was influenced by the statement in the agreed procedures following the first decision to dismiss that disciplinary action would not be taken pending the outcome of the hearing of an appeal (presuming the right to appeal was exercised) and evidence was adduced to show adherence to this principle. In the absence of such a provision or of a practice to the contrary, the effective date of dismissal will be the date on which termination is communicated to the employee and not the date on which he or she is informed that his appeal against dismissal failed.”

Application

There was no evidence of any “provision or practice” akin to that which applied on O’Neill in this case. It follows, therefore, that the Complainant’s effective date of dismissal was 12 January 2024. Her contract of employment stood terminated on that date and she was no longer an employee from that date forward for any purpose (notwithstanding that she could have been retrospectively reinstated had her internal appeal succeeded).

Decision

The Complainant’s employment was terminated by the Respondent on 12 January 2024 She was not an employee of the Respondent from that date onwards and, therefore, had no entitlement to continued payment of wages. It follows that the fact that the Respondent did not pay her in the period between the date of her dismissal and the date of the outcome of her internal appeal does not constitute a breach of the Act.

The appeal fails and the decision of the Adjudication Officer is upheld.

The Court so decides.

	Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
	Alan Haugh
CC	______________________
13/07/2026	Deputy Chairman

NOTE

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