Cidos Trading Ltd t/a Banba Toymaster (Represented by Cafferky Solicitors) v Stefan Jennings

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 05 December 2022
• Judgment citation (vLex): [2022] 12 JIEC 0504
• Docket Number: FULL RECOMMENDATION ADJ-00033733 CA-00044506-001 DETERMINATION NO. TED2216 SECTION 8 (1), TERMS OF EMPLOYMENT (INFORMATION) ACTS, 1994 TO 2014
• Court: Labour Court (Ireland)

PARTIES:

Cidos Trading Ltd t/a Banba Toymaster (Represented by Cafferky Solicitors)

and

Stefan Jennings

FULL RECOMMENDATION

TE/22/55

ADJ-00033733 CA-00044506-001

DETERMINATION NO. TED2216

SECTION 8 (1), TERMS OF EMPLOYMENT (INFORMATION) ACTS, 1994 TO 2014

Full Court

DIVISION:

Chairman: Mr Haugh

Employer Member: Mr Marie

Worker Member: Ms Treacy

SUBJECT:

1 1. Appeal Of Adjudication Officer Decision No(S) ADJ-00033733 CA-00044506-001.

BACKGROUND:

2 2. This is an appeal on behalf of Cidos Trading Limited T/A Banba Toymaster (‘the Respondent’) from a decision of an Adjudication Officer (ADJ-00033733/CA-00044506-001, dated 29 July 2022) under the Terms of Employment (Information) Act 1994 (‘the Act’). The Respondent's Notice of Appeal was received by the Court on 9 September 2022. The Court heard the appeal in Dublin on 29 November 2022.

3 Mr Stefan Jennings (‘the Complainant’) worked in the Respondent's toy store between 12 October and 8 December 2020. On 7 June 2021, the Complainant referred a complaint under section 7 of the Act to the Workplace Relations Commission in which he alleged that the Respondent had failed to furnish him with either a five-day or a two-month statement of terms and conditions as required under the Act. The Adjudication Officer decided the complaint under the Act was well-founded and directed the Respondent to pay compensation of €2,508.00 (equivalent to four weeks’ pay).

DETERMINATION:

Preliminary Issue

4 The Respondent's Notice of Appeal was received by the Court on 29 November 2022. The Representative for the Respondent submitted that the appeal was received within time as the aforementioned date should be regarded as falling on the forty-second day after the date of the Adjudication Officer's decision. He submitted that, in the alternative and should the Court not hold with him on in that regard, there were exceptional circumstances which justified the late referral of the appeal to the Court. Those, he said, consisted of the following: the Complainant's misunderstanding in relation to how the time for bringing an appeal is calculated; the fact that the appeal was received only one day out of time and that there was no prejudice to the Complainant arising from the delay.

The Law

5 Section 44(3) of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 provides:

• “(3) Subject to subsection (4), a notice under subsection (2) shall be given to the Labour Court not later than 42 days from the date of the decision concerned.”

6 Subsection (4) of the same section provides:

• “(4) The Labour Court may direct that a notice under subsection (2) may be given to it after the expiration of the period specified in subsection (3) if it is satisfied that the notice was not so given before such expiration...