Mullane v Desk & Design Centre Ltd

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 25 February 2004
• Judgment citation (vLex): [2004] 2 JIEC 2501
• Date: 25 February 2004
• Court: Employment Appeal Tribunal (Ireland)

Employment Appeals Tribunal

EAT: Mullane v Desk & Design Centre Ltd.

Representation:

Claimant(s):

Mr. John Boylan, Mc Nulty Bo34an& O'Herlihy,

Solicitors. 26-28 South Terrace, Cork

Respondent(s):

Not present or represented

Abstract:

EAT Employment law - Unfair dismissal - Whether claimant unfairly dismissed - Unfair Dismissals Acts 1977 to 2001 - Organisation of the Working Time Act 1997

EMPLOYMENT APPEALS TRIBUNAL

CASE NO

UD770/2001 MN2466/2001

WT222/2001

CLAIM(S) OF:

John Mullane, 59 Silveraprings Court, Tivoli, Cork

against

Desk & Design Centre Ltd, Pouladuff Industrial Estate, Togher, Cork

under

MINIMUM NOTICE AND TERMS OF EMPLOYMENT ACTS, 1973 TO 2001

ORGANISATJON OF WORKING TIME ACT, 1997

UNFAIR DISMISSALS ACTS, 1977 TO 2001

I certify that the Tribunal

(Division of Tribunal)

Chairman:

Mr. J. Sheedy

Members:

Mr. B. Sheedy

Mr. K. O'Connor

heard this claim at Cork on 13th March 2002

and 4th September 2002

Facts The claimant worked as a production manager. He was about to go on holiday when he became concerned that something was wrong. The following day an accountant who had joined the company informed him that his services were no longer required. The claimant inquired as to what the position regarding redundancy was and stated that he was promised a sum of money and the company car. He was told that he would be employed until he found alternative employment. When he returned to work after his holiday he was told not to return to work and that the redundancy would not be paid. He claimed that he had unfairly been dismissed

Held by the EAT in finding that the claimant was unfairly dismissed and awarding him the sum of Eur19,046.07 under the Unfair Dismissals Acts 1977 to 2001 and Eur708.51 under the Organisation of the Working Time Act 1997 that the Tribunal, having considered the evidence adduced, was unanimous that the claimant was unfairly dismissed.

1 The determination of the Tribunal was as follows:

2 During the proceedings the claim under the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Acts, 1973 to 2001 was withdrawn. The claimant's representative also stated that the claimant had received all his holiday entitlements.

Respondent's Case:

3 Giving evidence, a witness who was the respondents sales director (and a shareholder) said that he was involved in setting up the respondent company in 1993. The company designed and made office furniture. It started with...