Gut v Duffy [EAT]
EMPLOYMENT APPEALS TRIBUNAL
Claimant: Barry Healy & Company, Solicitors, "Laurel Lodge", Hillside, Monaghan
Respondent: No appearance by or on behalf of the respondent
The determination of the Tribunal was as follows:-
The Tribunal is satisfied that the respondent was properly notified of this hearing. Neither they nor representatives on their behalf appeared for this case.
The claimant worked as a general operative in the construction industry and was paid by cash or cheque on a weekly basis.
He received a telephone call from his employer on the evening of the 11 th May 2010 when he was advised not to come back to work. His employer told him he had found somebody to do the work at a lesser rate of pay.
As there was no appearance by the respondent, no evidence was proffered to the Tribunal that the claimant was fairly selected for redundancy and therefore fairly dismissed. In those circumstances, based on the claimant's uncontested evidence the Tribunal finds that the claim under the Unfair Dismissals Acts succeeds and awards the claimant compensation in the sum of €24,300.00 under the Unfair Dismissals Acts 1977 to 2007.
The Tribunal also awards the sum of € 700.00, this being two weeks gross wages, under the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Acts, 1973 to 2005
The claim under the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967 to 2007 and the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997, was withdrawn at the outset of the hearing.
To continue readingREQUEST YOUR TRIAL