Gut v Duffy [EAT]

 
FREE EXCERPT

EMPLOYMENT APPEALS TRIBUNAL

CASE NO.

RP2229/2010

UD1664/2010

MN1593/2010

WT717/2010

CLAIM OF:

Pavel Gut, 33 Clements Town, Cootehill, Co Cavan
and
Des Duffy, Killycramp, Cootehill, Co Cavan and Tevena Limited, Killycramp, Cootehill, Co Cavan
Representation:

_______________

Claimant: Barry Healy & Company, Solicitors, "Laurel Lodge", Hillside, Monaghan

Respondent: No appearance by or on behalf of the respondent

1

The determination of the Tribunal was as follows:-

2

The Tribunal is satisfied that the respondent was properly notified of this hearing. Neither they nor representatives on their behalf appeared for this case.

Claimants Case:
3

The claimant worked as a general operative in the construction industry and was paid by cash or cheque on a weekly basis.

4

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.

Determination:
5

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.

6

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

7

The claim under the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967 to 2007 and the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997, was withdrawn at the outset of the hearing.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 reading

REQUEST YOUR TRIAL