Buckley v Blarney Toolhire Ltd

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 06 February 2009
• Judgment citation (vLex): [2009] 2 JIEC 0601
• Date: 06 February 2009
• Court: Employment Appeal Tribunal (Ireland)

Employment Appeals Tribunal

EAT: Buckley (claimant) v Blarney Toolhire Limited (respondent)

Abstract:

Employment law - Redundancy - Fair procedures - Examinership - Whether claimant's employment ended by reason of redundancy - Redundancy Payments Acts, 1967 To 2003 - Unfair Dismissals Acts 1977 to 2001 - Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Acts 1973 to 2001 - Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997.

EMPLOYMENT APPEALS TRIBUNAL

CLAIMS OF:	CASE NO.
Michael Buckley, Newcastle, Blarney, Co Cork Claimant	UD8/2008
	RP13/2008
	MN7/2008
	WT2/2008

against

Blarney Toolhire Limited T/A C.P.H., Blackstone Bridge,

Lower Killeens, Co Cork –Respondent

Under

UNFAIR DISMISSALS ACTS, 1977 TO 2001

REDUNDANCY PAYMENTS ACTS, 1967 TO 2003

MINIMUM NOTICE AND TERMS OF EMPLOYMENT ACTS, 1973 TO 2001

ORGANISATION OF WORKING TIME ACT, 1997

I certify that the Tribunal

(Division of Tribunal)

Chairman:	Ms. K. T. O'Mahony B.L.
Members:	Ms M. Sweeney
	Mr J. McDonnell

heard this claim at Cork on 23 July 2008

and 6 February 2009

Facts The respondent was in the business of hiring out machines such as diggers and dumpers. The claimant was the manager of the maintenance division of the company. In June 2007 the respondent went into examinership and another company (A) bought the respondent when the examinership ended. Following a review of the respondent company it was decided that the operations manager of Company A could also undertake the claimant's duties as maintenance manager in the respondent. The claimant's other duties were assigned to other employees. On this basis the claimant and other employees were made redundant. It was the claimant's evidence that he had been told at his dismissal that if things picked up they would be looking for someone again in the near future; this was denied by the respondent. A decision was taken that the respondent would diversify into sales and positions were advertised. The claimant contended that he had, inter alia, a licence to drive an articulated truck and had not been considered for this or any other positions. The respondent contended that the claimant had neither applied for the positions nor ever made it known that he had an articulated truck licence.

Held by the Employment Appeals Tribunal in declining to make any award. The Tribunal was satisfied that there were serious difficulties in the respondent's business. It...