Prepare a case note on the following decision:Baranya v Rosderra Irish Meats Group Ltd [2021] IESC 77, [2022] 33 ELR 73.*You must refer to the judgments of both Hogan and Charleton JJ*Remember, in a...

1 answer below »

View more »
Answered 1 days AfterNov 07, 2022

Answer To: Prepare a case note on the following decision:Baranya v Rosderra Irish Meats Group Ltd [2021] IESC...

Tarun answered on Nov 08 2022
60 Votes
BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE
Mr Baranya (hereinafter referred to as “Appellant”) was an employee from Hungary who worked as a competent butcher for Rosderra Irish Meats Group Limited (hereinafter referred to as “Company/the Respondent”). He left his employm
ent in June 2015 to either return to Hungary or look for work in the Netherlands. However, a few weeks after his contract expired, the Appellant requested a reinstatement. In July 2015, he returned to work at the Respondent. He claimed he was brought back on a permanent basis, while the Respondent stated it was only a 12-week contract. In September 2015, the Appellant complained to his employer, the Respondent, about pain and his desire to no longer score meat. There was some disagreement over what the Appellant actually said. Furthermore, the Respondent claimed that he told his employer that he was in a lot of discomfort because of the labour he had to do and sought to be transferred to another position. The Respondent asserted that he just mentioned that he was in discomfort and did not say it was because of his job. After walking off the production line three days later, the Appellant was fired. He filed an Unfair Dismissals Act claim against the Respondent in the WRC. He did not, however, have 12 months' service because he left his position in June 2015. The Appellant contended that because he was fired for making a protected disclosure about the discomfort he was experiencing while performing his job, he was exempt from the need of 12 months' service to pursue his claim.
THE PROCEDURAL HISTORY:
· WORKPLACE RELATIONS COMMISSION PROCEEDINGS: The Appellant initially filed a claim with the Workplace Relations Commission (hereinafter referred to as “WRC”) against an Adjudication Officer ((hereinafter referred to as “AO”) for unfair dismissal based on making a protected disclosure. The AO ruled against the Appellant because his complaint was a personal grievance rather than a protected disclosure.
· LABOUR COURT: The Appellant then filed an appeal before the Labour Court, which also determined that the communication in question did not constitute a protected disclosure because it did not reveal any wrongdoing on Respondent’s part, and that the communication in question was an expression of a grievance rather than a protected disclosure. The Industrial Relations Act 1990 (Code of Practice on the Protected Disclosure Act 2014) Declaration Order 2015 appears to have affected the Labour Court's determination that it was a grievance (the Code)....
SOLUTION.PDF

Answer To This Question Is Available To Download

Related Questions & Answers

More Questions »

Submit New Assignment

Copy and Paste Your Assignment Here
April
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
2025
2025
2026
2027
SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
30
31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
1
2
3
00:00
00:30
01:00
01:30
02:00
02:30
03:00
03:30
04:00
04:30
05:00
05:30
06:00
06:30
07:00
07:30
08:00
08:30
09:00
09:30
10:00
10:30
11:00
11:30
12:00
12:30
13:00
13:30
14:00
14:30
15:00
15:30
16:00
16:30
17:00
17:30
18:00
18:30
19:00
19:30
20:00
20:30
21:00
21:30
22:00
22:30
23:00
23:30