Pascal Mooney v Raymark Engineering Limited [2022]
Decision Number: ADJ-00033453
Published on: 20/06/2022
Issues Covered:
Article Authors The main content of this article was provided by the following authors.
Background

The Complainant brought his complaint before the WRC to seek that the Respondent pay him the statutory minimum notice period following the ending of his employment on the 27th of March 2020.

The Complainant outlined that the business closed overnight on the 27th of March 2020 and he had been dismissed without notice. The Complainant and his colleagues were informed that the Respondent company would enter liquidation and that a liquidator would pay their entitlements arising from the ending of their employment. The Complainant submitted that the company did not enter liquidation and that this was an attempt to avoid the company’s debts. The complainant outlined that this amounted to reasonable cause in respect of the timing of the complaint, as well as did the circumstances of the pandemic.

The Complainant’s employment commenced on the 22nd of October 2001. He submitted that he is owed €7,038.72. The complainant submitted that his loss was not being paid the notice pay.

The Respondent did not dispute the Complainant’s claim.

In light of the above, the Adjudication Officer found that that the Complainant was entitled to 8 weeks of statutory notice pay, i.e the sum of €7,038.72. The Adjudication Officer noted that the Respondent did not, in fact, enter liquidation and nor has it been liquidated. It is a subsisting legal entity.

The Adjudication Officer noted that the Complainant had established reasonable cause in respect of when the complaint was lodged. The complaint was lodged relatively shortly after the period of six months from the date of his dismissal ended.

Guidance for Employers

The Complainant must show that there are reasons that explain the delay and afford an excuse for the delay. The Complainant in this case delayed submitting the complaint because of statements made to him by the Respondent, citing relevant case law, the Adjudication Officer found that it was ‘perfectly reasonable’ for the Complainant to wait for the liquidation process to start and take its course.
https://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/cases/2022/may/adj-00033453.html

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 20/06/2022
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 →