Feely v Keane [EAT]

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Court: Employment Appeal Tribunal (Ireland)
• Judgment Date: 24 April 2012
• Judgment citation (vLex): [2012] 4 JIEC 2405
• Docket Number: Rp3155/2010,MN2290/2010
• Date: 24 April 2012

EMPLOYMENT APPEALS TRIBUNAL

CASE NO. Rp3155/2010

MN2290/2010

APPEAL(S) OF:

Carol Feely, 154 Seacrest, Knocknacarra, Galway

Appellant

and

Patrick M Keane T/a Keane Solicitors, Hardiman House, Eyre Square, Galway

Respondent

Representation:

Appellant(s) : Mr Conor Dalton, Lockhart O'Leary Maher, Solicitors, 191 Howth Road, Killester, Dublin 3

Respondent(s) :In person

Under

REDUNDANCY PAYMENTS ACTS, 1967 TO 2007

MINIMUM NOTICE AND TERMS OF EMPLOYMENT ACTS, 1973 TO 2005

I certify that the Tribunal (Division of Tribunal)

Chairman: Mr R. Maguire, B.L.

Members: Mr. W. O'Canoll

Mr M. McGarry

heard this appeal at Galway on 24th April 2012

Respondents Case

1 The respondent (PK) told the Tribunal that the appellant completed her apprenticeship with his firm over a nine year period. On completion and passing her final solicitor exams he informed her that she would not be retained by the practice. PK said the appellant asked to remain on in the practice in the role as legal secretary on a week to week basis until she obtained employment elsewhere. He agreed this on the basis she would not have any statutory rights. He subsequently became aware she had turned down two offers of employment during that time. Because he had informed her that she was not being retained he understood she did not qualify or was not entitled to redundancy. He told the Tribunal the appellant was not included on the practice insurance or submitted to the role of solicitor during that period following passing her exams.

2 PK said the appellant was a good worker and he had no issues with her. Following an issue relating to the misappropriation of monies in the practice by another employee he could not keep the appellant on and took the decision to downsize.

Appellant Case

3 The appellant (CF) gave evidence of commencing employment with the respondent in 2001 as a legal secretary. She was later offered an apprenticeship by the respondent and after a number of years passed her solicitor exams. Following passing her exams she was aware that the position was not permanent. Her statutory entitlements were never discussed during that time. She said that when it was agreed she would remain on at the practice it was never expressed to her that it was based on a week to week basis. CF explained she was offered a job to act as principle for a solicitor who had been restricted however she did not accept the offer. She received no other offers of employment. CF...