Skip to main content

DWT1814

FULL RECOMMENDATION

WTC/17/77
DETERMINATIONNO.DWT1814
ADJ-00000981 CA-00001380-004

SECTION 28 (1), ORGANISATION OF WORKING TIME ACT, 1997



PARTIES :
MOTOR SERVICES LIMITED T/A MSL BALLSBRIDGE MOTORS
(REPRESENTED BY M.P. GUINNESS, B.L., INSTRUCTED BY WHITNEY MOORE, SOLICITORS)

- AND -

GEOFFREY DUNNE
(REPRESENTED BY MILEY & MILEY, SOLICITORS)


DIVISION :

Chairman: Mr Haugh
Employer Member: Mr Murphy
Worker Member: Ms Treacy
SUBJECT:
1. Appeal of Adjudication Officer Decision No.:ADJ-00000981


BACKGROUND:

2. The Employer appealed a decision of an Adjudication Officer to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 28(1) of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 10 May 2018. The following is the Determination of the Court:-

DETERMINATION:

This matter came before the Court by way of an appeal brought on behalf of Motor Services Limited T/A MSL Ballsbridge Motors (‘the Appellant’) against a decision of an Adjudication Officer (ADJ-00000981, dated 23 October 2017) under the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997 (‘the Act’). Mr Geoffrey Dunne (‘the Complainant’) made two complaints under the Act against the Respondent: (i) a complaint that the Respondent had not fulfilled its obligations under section 20 Act of the Act in relation to the Complainant’s request for annual leave in July 2015; and (ii) a complaint that the Respondent did not ensure that the Complainant received his daily rest breaks in accordance with section 12 of the Act. The Adjudication Offer held that both complaints were well-founded and awarded the Complainant compensation of €8,000.00 for the breach of section 20 of the Act and €750.00 for the breach of section 12.

The Appellant’s Notice of Appeal against that decision was received by the Court on 1 December 2017. The Court heard the appeal in Dublin on 10 May 2018. As the appeal before this Court is a de novo hearing of the case, the burden of rests on the Complainant. However, the Complainant offered no evidence to the Court in support of his complaints under the Act.

In all the circumstances, therefore, the Court finds both complaints under the Act are not well-founded and sets aside the decision of the Adjudication Officer.

The Court so determines.




Signed on behalf of the Labour Court



Alan Haugh
25 May 2018______________________
THDeputy Chairman



NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Determination should be addressed to Therese Hickey, Court Secretary.