H.A. O’Neil Limited v Unite the Union, Patrick James Goold, William Mangan and Damian Jones [2024]
Decision Number: IESC 8 Legal Body: Irish Supreme Court
Published on: 28/03/2025
Issues Covered:
Article Authors The main content of this article was provided by the following authors.
Duncan Inverarity Partner & Head of Employment Law, A&L Goodbody LLP
Duncan Inverarity Partner & Head of Employment Law, A&L Goodbody LLP
Duncan inverarity 100x100

Duncan Inverarity a partner and Head of A&L Goodbody's Employment Law group and has practiced exclusively in the area of employment law and industrial relations in multiple jurisdictions. Duncan advises public and private sector employers on both contentious and non-contentious matters. He advises Board rooms across Ireland and abroad on strategic and complex employment and industrial relations matters. Duncan also specialises in crisis management for clients and has advised on some of the most high profile corporate issues in Ireland. Duncan regularly appears for clients in the Workplace Relations Commission, the Circuit Court, the High Court, the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court. Duncan also acts for partnerships in mediated settlements and in proceedings in the High Court.

Summary

The Supreme Court ruled that the High Court was wrong to grant an injunction restraining members of ‘Unite the Union’ from taking industrial action. The court found that the key legislation that governs industrial relations in Ireland provides an “absolute bar” to courts granting injunctions restraining industrial action where the correct legal procedures have been followed.

Background

The company H.A. O’Neil Limited, which provides mechanical and engineering services for the construction sector, and the union, were in dispute over a demand for the restoration of a travel allowance of one hour’s pay that had previously been paid to employees. In seeking the injunction, the firm claimed the industrial action, which included the placing of pickets at sites where it conducts its business, was unlawful and argued a valid trade dispute did not exist between it and the union.

It also claimed Unite’s ballot of its members employed at H A O’Neil breached the 1990 Industrial Relations Act. It further claimed that the parties were bound by the terms of a sectoral employment order (SEO) which contained a dispute resolution and no-strike clauses. No industrial action could be taken until the dispute resolution clause had been exhausted, it alleged.

The injunction was granted by the High Court, Ms Justice Miriam O’Regan following the first strike on March 10th, 2023. The union, represented by Eoin McCullough SC, opposed the injunction application before the High Court and appealed the order to the Supreme Court.

Outcome

A five-judge Supreme Court unanimously allowed the union’s appeal. The judges noted that the injunction was previously discharged and the particular SEO was quashed by the courts in separate proceedings.

In his judgement the Chief Justice said the relevant section of the 1990 Act provides an “absolute bar” to the granting of an injunction restraining the industrial action where the conditions of the relevant section are met. Mr Justice O’Donnell said the section should not be interpreted narrowly or restrictively as this would “defeat the purpose” of legislation to protect unions and their members.

He added that here the union established that industrial action was being pursued by a registered union, that the outcome of the ballot favoured taking action, and that no less than a week’s notice was given to the employer. The union had also established a fair case that it may need to take further action. In these circumstances, the injunction should not have been granted, the Chief Justice said.

He also noted the freedom to form associations and unions is guaranteed by Article 40.6.1 of the Constitution and the entitlement to take part in industrial action must be seen in that context. An important aspect of any right is the choice of when and where to exercise it, he added.

In his concurring decision Mr Justice Hogan said that the 1990 Act gives the Oireachtas the right to regulate trade union activity under Article 40.6.1 of the Constitution. The courts “should not readily circumvent or frustrate this right”, he said.

Practical Guidance
  • The 1990 Industrial Relations Act gives Trade Unions the right to choose when and where to exercise their rights, which will be upheld in Court.

  • This Act should not be interpreted narrowly or restrictively as this would “defeat the purpose” of legislation to protect unions and their members.

Continue reading

We help hundreds of people like you understand how the latest changes in employment law impact your business.

Already a subscriber?

Please log in to view the full article.

What you'll get:

  • Help understand the ramifications of each important case from NI, GB and Europe
  • Ensure your organisation's policies and procedures are fully compliant with NI law
  • 24/7 access to all the content in the Legal Island Vault for research case law and HR issues
  • Receive free preliminary advice on workplace issues from the employment team

Already a subscriber? Log in now or start a free trial

Disclaimer The information in this article is provided as part of Legal Island's Employment Law Hub. We regret we are not able to respond to requests for specific legal or HR queries and recommend that professional advice is obtained before relying on information supplied anywhere within this article. This article is correct at 28/03/2025
Conflict of Interest at Work
All Staff
Popular
eLearning Course
Legal Island’s LMS, licensed to you Imagine your staff having 24/7 access to a centralised training platform, tailored to your organisation’s brand and staff training needs, with unlimited users. Learn more →