Case Number: ADJ-00000604. Workplace Relations Commission

CourtWorkplace Relations Commission
Docket NumberADJ-00000604
Date02 March 2016
PartiesAn Employee v An Employer

In accordance with Section 41(4) of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 following the referral of the complaint(s)/dispute(s) to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint(s)/dispute(s) and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint(s)/dispute(s).

ADJ – 00000604

Preliminary Matters

Re: CA – 00000878 – 001

At the outset of the hearing the complainant stated that the complaint under the Payment of Wages Act was withdrawn. The withdrawal of the complaint was re-confirmed later in the hearing.

Re: CA – 00000963 – 001

An issue relating to this complaint had been raised by the respondent in an email dated 14 January 2016, sent to the Workplace Relations Commission. In this email the respondent submitted that this claim, (original Labour Relations Commission reference number r-159574-te-15) had been the subject of a hearing by a Rights Commissioner on 19 November 2015, and that a decision dismissing the case for want of prosecution had been issued on 8 January 2016. It was the respondent's case that this complaint had already been dealt with and that they could not be expected to defend the same claim before the same forum under the same Act for a second time.

As I was aware of the respondent's position on this matter I explained to complainant that before I could examine the complaint I would have to satisfy myself I had jurisdiction to hear the complaint. I asked the complaint's representative to outline his case to me as to why I should hear the complaint.

He said that the claim had not been heard and had been dismissed for want of prosecution. He stated that at the hearing the Adjudication Officer had not taken account of the evidence he had wished to produce because the complainant herself was not present. He said that the "case wasn't heard".

The respondent had a prepared written submission. In essence the argument put forward was that as this claim had already been subject to a hearing and a decision had been issued on the matter, it should not therefore be subject to a second hearing in the same forum.

In response the complainant said that he would be flabbergasted if the WRC decided not to hear the case. He said the first claim had been dismissed.


Section 41(4) of the Workplace...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT