The Employment Appeals Tribunal issues many decisions each week. In addition to the more detailed analysis provided by Eversheds on particularly important legal points in specific cases that we provide via this service, readers may be interested in some of these case decisions, all issued since 15th November:


Frank Conlon v Roadstone Wood Limited

Where the claimant was made redundant. The Tribunal accepted the evidence of the claimant and found that he was not offered alternative positions. The Tribunal held that “there is a heavy onus on an employer to prove that it acted reasonably and fairly towards an employee selected for redundancy and a consequential duty to use fair procedures in making a redundancy” and the respondents failed this test. Therefore, the Tribunal found that the claimant was unfairly selected for redundancy and the claimant was awarded €28,000.00 under the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 to 2007:
http://www.eatribunal.ie/determinationAttachments/429d0017-646c-435f-b40a-7a59ef56f737.pdf


Peter Downes v Usher Aviation (Ireland) Limited

Where the claimant worked on maintenance and repair of light aircraft. The Tribunal was satisfied that the dismissal was, apart from procedural failings, substantively justified and the claimant therefore contributed to an extremely large extent to his own dismissal. Taking into account the contribution of the claimant the Tribunal awarded the claimant the sum of €2,000.00, as compensation, having regard to all the circumstances, under the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 To 2007:
http://www.eatribunal.ie/determinationAttachments/9d397016-b9a8-4453-9cae-dba32667cdc5.pdf


Michal Ragab v Sam Denigan & Co:

Where the claimant was summarily dismissed for allegedly being disrespectful to a superior, without being given any warning that he might lose his job, nor given any opportunity with advance notice to present his case. The Tribunal held that no fair procedures were followed in respect of the incident and thus awarded the claimant €20,000 under the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 to 2007:
http://www.eatribunal.ie/determinationAttachments/3b7fe56d-0af0-4b90-a2ef-1fac2f3aaf4a.pdf


Yohann Turbak v Goode Concrete

Where the claimant was employed as the Financial Controller with the respondent company. The case involved an allegation of theft by the respondent against the claimant arising out of which the claimant was dismissed from his employment. Due to the uncontested evidence of the claimant, the Tribunal found that the claimant was unfairly dismissed and awards the claimant €63,710.33 under the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 to 2007:
http://www.eatribunal.ie/determinationAttachments/bfe93914-034b-421e-8024-4c491c3dfdaf.pdf


Claire Corcoran v Embassy of the Kingdom of Lesotho

Where the claimant felt she was constructively dismissed by the respondent company. Having considered all the evidence in the case the Tribunal determined that “the claimant did act reasonably. She tried to resolve the issue with the respondent prior to resigning, but the respondent failed to engage in a meaningful way”. The Tribunal further determined that compensation was the most appropriate remedy under the Unfair Dismissals Acts 1977 to 2007, and awarded the claimant €40,495.26:
http://www.eatribunal.ie/determinationAttachments/126df8d9-b87b-4978-981c-016b3bcb79cc.pdf


Colin Casey v Bernard Conlon – respondent 1, Pat Roddy – respondent 2, Tony Matthews – respondent 3, Tony Roddy – respondent 4 and Lancorn BT Limited – respondent 5

Where the claimant was a bar Manager in a bar that was leased by respondent 1. After a break-in at the bar and an argument with his employer there was a dispute whether the claimant had resigned. There was no appearance by or representation on behalf of the respondents. Thus, due to the uncontested evidence, the Tribunal awarded the claimant €30,303.00 under the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 to 2007:
http://www.eatribunal.ie/determinationAttachments/ab637cd4-b429-4269-88dd-c8f2328d5b85.pdf


Edward Egan v Noxtad Limited

Where the claimant gave uncontested evidence that he was unfairly selected for redundancy. The Tribunal held that that the claimant’s position was not made redundant and that a named individual (RN) was put in this position. The Tribunal therefore found that the claimant was unfairly dismissed and awarded the claimant €42,879.00:
http://www.eatribunal.ie/determinationAttachments/66659b05-0a52-4554-a05c-0d7074acbe31.pdf


Olivia Barry v Quinn Insurance Limited

Where the Claimant’s claim under the Unfair Dismissals Acts,1977 to 2007 failed. Having carefully considered the totality of the evidence adduced the Tribunal could not find any substantial grounds that a dismissal took place in this case. “The claimant did not produce sufficient and adequate evidence that the respondent dismissed her even in a constructive fashion”:
http://www.eatribunal.ie/determinationAttachments/a12b9579-2825-4035-b256-78beee693e83.pdf


Serena Walsh v Quilty's Pub Limited (in Liquidation)

Where the claimant was working as a barmaid and was dismissed. The claimant was told that there was insufficient work because of the downturn. Two weeks previous to this another employee had her hours increased and there were advertisements for jobs in the place she worked. The Tribunal were unanimous that the claimant was unfairly dismissed under the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 To 2007. Compensation was awarded in the sum of €27,000.00:
http://www.eatribunal.ie/determinationAttachments/eab8ceba-1440-4c00-a9e0-ee37dba8717b.pdf


Frank McClintock v Health Services Executive (HSE)

Where the claimant was Assistant National Director of the Respondent company and there was an issue with travel and subsistence claims. The claimant had obtained a fuel card that was used sporadically whenever he was not getting any travel and subsistence. The issue arose regarding how and why he had a fuel card and the Claimant felt he had no other option but to resign rather than be dismissed. The Tribunal determined that “this termination was caused by the actions of the employer in failing to apply the agreed procedures and thus constitutes an Unfair Dismissal.” However in considering the remedies under the Acts the Tribunal looked at the reasons for the actions of the employer that gave rise to the dismissal. The Tribunal held that due to the facts outlined in the determination that there would be no compensation award to the claimant:
http://www.eatribunal.ie/determinationAttachments/952d196d-480b-4f55-b879-ee217c56e0b7.pdf


Jennifer Beary v Brian Mordaunt & Sons Limited

Where, on the uncontested evidence of the claimant, the Tribunal determined that she was unfairly dismissed and awarded the claimant the sum of €72,000. The Tribunal held that “it was reasonable for the claimant to leave her employment in light of the treatment received by her at the hands of her employer”:
http://www.eatribunal.ie/determinationAttachments/a03fc458-beac-4094-a12b-0d35be09c660.pdf


Oliver Flanagan v Castlethorn Construction

Where the claimant’s case was that he was unfairly selected for redundancy and indeed was not redundant at all as his work was being done by other employees. The claim under the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 to 2007 failed:
http://www.eatribunal.ie/determinationAttachments/910dc3cb-a709-49c5-b912-c3414da03e58.pdf


Delia Sabau v Shop To Shop Limited (In Liquidation) T/A Boccaccio

Where based on the claimant’s uncontested evidence the Tribunal found that “she had discharged the burden of proof in relation to her claim of constructive dismissal”. The Tribunal awarded the claimant the sum of €47,500 under the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977 to 2007:
http://www.eatribunal.ie/determinationAttachments/5c34eb2c-9d85-47e8-8b7e-5ccec08c7487.pdf


Jane Mangan v Clontarf Creche Limited

Where, following a reported incident and complaint involving children while under the care of the crèche during a field activity, the claimant was called to a lunch time meeting. No representation was offered to those employees nor were they informed that disciplinary action, including dismissal, was a factor in this case. After a further meeting the claimant, along with two other employees, was dismissed. The Tribunal held that “the respondent as accepted did not follow its own procedures and its defence in not adhering to those procedures is not acceptable to the Tribunal”. Therefore the claim under the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 to 2007 succeeded and the claimant was awarded €23,000.00 as compensation under those Acts:
http://www.eatribunal.ie/determinationAttachments/bd5946c4-fc25-48d4-b5cd-93ea3f0ad5ce.pdf


Monica Molloy v Dunamaggin Credit Union Limited

Where the claimant was a clerical assistant when she started working for the Respondent company. Her job soon progressed to Manager’s Assistant, which entailed extra responsibilities. The claimant resigned when difficulties between her and a work colleague resulted in the claimant suffering a stress related illness. The Tribunal found that the respondent “did not engage in conduct sufficiently grave or any conduct such as entitled the claimant to consider herself constructively dismissed”. Accordingly the claim under the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977 to 2007 failed:

http://www.eatribunal.ie/determinationAttachments/551c89ad-e27b-45d8-8d9c-401c0e1f1178.pdf