Wright v Farrell T/A Willowbrook Nursing Home

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 10 August 2004
• Judgment citation (vLex): [2004] 8 JIEC 1003
• Date: 10 August 2004
• Court: Employment Appeal Tribunal (Ireland)

Employment Appeals Tribunal

EAT: Wright v Farrell T/A Willowbrook Nursing Home

Representation:

Appellant(s):

Mr. Stephen Maher, Stephen Maher, Solicitors, 6 The Courts, Main Street, Newbridge, Co. Kildare

Respondent(s):

Mr. Vincent Scallan BL instructed by Neville Murphy & Company, Solicitors, Dargle House, 1 Lower Main Skeet, Bray, Co. Wicklow

This case came to the Tribunal by way of appeal against Rights Commissioner Recommendation UD12325/02/LM.

Abstract:

EAT - Employment law - Unfair dismissal - Fair procedures - Whether employee unfairly dismissed - Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977 to 2001.

EMPLOYMENT APPEALS TRIBUNAL

CASE NO.

UD981/2003

APPEAL(S) OF:

Hannah Wright, 10 Mill View, Ballytore, Athy, Co. Kildare

against the recommendation of the Rights Commissioner in the case of:

Robert Farrell T/A Willowbrook Nursing Home, Borohard, Newbridge, Co.Kildare

Under UNFAIR DISMISSALS ACTS, 1977 TO 2001

And

MN287/2004

Hannah Wright, 10 Mill View, Ballytore, Athy, Co. Kildare

against

Robert Farrell T/A Willowbrook Nursing Home, Borohard, Newbridge, Co. Kildare

Under MINIMUM NOTICE AND TERMS OF EMPLOYMENT ACTS, 1973 TO 2001

I certify that the Tribunal

(Division of Tribunal)

Chairman:	Ms. E. Daly BL
Members:	Mr. R. Murphy
	Mr. D. Mahon

heard this appeal in Naas on 19 March2004

Facts The claimant brought a claim for unfair dismissal against her former employer. The claimant contended that she was working on a night shift and that she had fallen asleep whilst on her break. It was contended that her employer had come into the building, had taken a photograph of her and had started shouting at her. It was also contended that her employer had told her that she would never get a job in Ireland again and was dismissed. The claimant that she then left work before the end of her shift and subsequently collected her P45 and some wages. The respondent employer contended that staff were not allowed sleep on breaks as they were on duty during these breaks. The respondent contended that he had not dismissed the claimant and did not believe it was his duty to contact somebody who left.

Held by the Employment Appeals Tribunal in awarding two weeks pay to the claimant. The respondent was not entitled to summarily dismiss the claimant. However the claimant had contributed to her dismissal and had failed to mitigate her loss. The claimant would also be awarded one weeks pay under the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Acts, 1973 to 2001.

The determination of the Tribunal was as follows:-

Appellant's Case

...