Blog Layout

Appeal to Labour Court – Time Limits


Time limit for appeal to Labour Court

Introduction – Appeal to Labour Court


If a party to proceedings at the Workplace Relations Commission is unhappy with the outcome, they may appeal that decision to the Labour Court. 


The Rules of the Labour Court 2020 provide that:


“The Court hears appeals under all of the various employment law statutes where an individual worker complains of a breach of their statutory employment rights by their employer. Either or both parties may refer an appeal of an Adjudication Officer’s Decision in employment rights cases to the Labour Court within 42 days of the date of the Adjudication Officer’s Decision, using the Labour Court Employment Rights Appeal Form which is available at www.labourcourt.ie.” 


Time Limit for Appeal to Labour Court


The time limit of 42 days starts from and includes the date of the Adjudication Officer’s Decision. For the avoidance of doubt, the date of the Adjudication Officer’s Decision is counted as day 1 of the 42 days. 

Appeals sent by post can be given to the Court in the ordinary course of the Court’s business and the day of receipt will be recorded using a date stamp manually applied during the ordinary course of business on the day the appeal is received. Appeals submitted by email at appeals@labourcourt.ie can be made up to 12 midnight on the 42nd day and the date of receipt will be the date and time automatically recorded on the email system. 


Where an appeal has not been received within the 42-day period, the appellant can apply to extend the time for bringing an appeal in accordance with Section 44(4) of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015. That application will require to be supported by any relevant argument as part of the written submission required to be made to the Court as part of the substantive appeal.


Extending the Time Limit – Exceptional Circumstances


An appellant, who fails to submit an appeal within the 42-day time period, may be challenged as to the validity of their appeal. In such circumstances, the appellant will need to show there were exceptional circumstances that prevented them from lodging an appeal within the 42 days.


It is settled law that in order to consider an appeal of this nature, the Labour Court must first be satisfied that exceptional circumstances were in existence during the period for the giving of an appeal notice to the Labour Court and the Labour Court must also be satisfied that the exceptional circumstances applying prevented the giving of a notice of an appeal to the Labour Court.


In Eire Continental Trading Company Ltd v Clonmel Foods Ltd (1955) IR170, the Supreme Court considered time limits allowable for the lodgement of an appeal contained within the Rules of the Superior Courts. The appellant in that case noted certain conditions raised by Mr Justice Lavery in his judgement, a judgement with which the Court agreed, which ought to be satisfied:


"1. The applicant must show that he had a bona fide intention to appeal formed within the permitted time.


2. He must show the existence of something like mistake and that mistake as to procedure and in particular the mistake of Counsel or Solicitor as to the meaning of the relevant rule was not sufficient.


3. He must establish that an arguable ground of appeal existed."


In Gaelscoil Thulach na nOg and Joyce Fitzimons-Markey (EET034), it was noted that:


The Court must first consider if the circumstances relied upon by the applicant can be regarded as exceptional. If it answers that question in the affirmative the Court must then go on to consider if those circumstances operated so as to prevent the applicant from lodging her claim in time.


The term exceptional is an ordinary familiar English adjective and not a term of art. It describes a circumstance which is such as to form an exception, which is out of the ordinary course or unusual or special or uncommon. To be exceptional a circumstance need not be unique or unprecedented or very rare; but it cannot be one which is regular or routinely or normally encountered.”


Conclusion 


The burden of proof in establishing the existence of exceptional circumstances rests with the appellant. To discharge that burden the appellant must present clear and cogent evidence to support the contention that exceptional circumstances within the meaning of Section 44(4) of the Workplace Relations Commission Act of 2015 exist and that those circumstances acted so as to prevent the appellant from lodging their appeal in time.


Share

Remote  work laws in Ireland
by RG343171 16 August 2024
The case of Aline Karabko v TikTok Technology Ltd (ADJ-00051600) examines the obligations employers have, under Irish law, when a request for remote work is made by an employee. As the law in Ireland currently stands, there is no right to remote work per se. This may be overcome when an individual has been guaranteed remote work in their contract of employment or remote work has been determined to constitute a reasonable accommodation in accordance with relevant employment legislation, where applicable. However, none of these exceptions applied in the present case.
Section 18 of the Parental Leave Act
9 August 2024
The case of Dean Hart v Komfort Kare (ADJ00051923) examines the circumstances under which a request for time off, by a parent, from their employer, must be given due consideration. Dean Hart (the Complainant) brought a complaint under Section 18 of the Parental Leave Act 1998 against Komfort Kare (the Respondent) to the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC), alleging that they denied him the right to take force majeure despite extenuating circumstances.
Constructive Dismissal and Sexual Harassment
31 July 2024
The case of Care Worker v Costern Unlimited Company (ADJ00046268) examines the circumstances under which it will be deemed reasonable for an employee to resign and bring a claim of unfair dismissal by way of constructive dismissal on foot of a failure of their employer to properly investigate their complaints.
Payment of notice pay after probation
6 June 2024
The case of Eric Bentley v Carcharger EV Limited (ADJ00050468) examines the circumstances under which an employee will be entitled to a payment in lieu of notice if dismissed during their probationary period. This is a very interesting case, as it was brought under the payment of wages provisions, but decided upon under notice legislation.
Interview discrimination
5 June 2024
The case of A Job Applicant v A Public Body (ADJ00049321) examines the burden of proof in discrimination claims, particularly when discrimination is being claimed at the interview stage.
The Burden of Proof in Constructive Dismissal Claims in Ireland
3 June 2024
The case of Mark Lowry v JJ Fleming and Company Limited (ADJ00036677) examines the burden of proof issues that often arise in constructive dismissal claims. Uniquely, the employer offered no substantive evidence to support their case, yet won, highlighting the very difficult hurdles an employee often faces in bringing an unfair dismissal claim following their resignation.
Show More
Share by: