This case concerns dismissal on return from maternity leave. The respondent was in liquidation and did not participate in the proceedings. The Tribunal had to satisfy itself on the burden of proof in line with the Labour Court decision in Arturs Valpeters v Melbury Developments [2010] 21 E.L.R. 64 where it stated, “[Section 85A of the Acts] requires that the Complainant must first establish facts from which discrimination may be inferred. What those facts are will vary from case to case and there is no closed category of facts which can be relied upon. All that is required is that they be of sufficient significance to raise a presumption of discrimination. However they must be established as facts on credible evidence. Mere speculation or assertions, unsupported by evidence, cannot be elevated to a factual basis upon which an inference of discrimination can be drawn.”

In this case, the complainant gave evidence that a male replacement had been recruited while she was on maternity leave and that her continued in employment after her return. She also produced payslips, P45 and other documentation on her return to work following her maternity leave. Therefore, the Tribunal concluded that there was prima facie evidence of a discriminatory dismissal on the gender ground and, in the absence of any arguments on behalf of the respondent to rebut the case, it found in favour of the complainant. She was awarded €6000, which is roughly equivalent to six months’ salary, for the effects of the discrimination suffered.

http://www.equalitytribunal.ie/Database-of-Decisions/2012/Employment-Equality-Decisions/DEC-E2012-138-Full-Case-Report.html