Judgment: 2022-02-24 · Court archive

High Court dismisses appeal over Ashford Castle employee’s dismissal

The court found no error of law in the Labour Court’s decision that the dismissal on capability grounds was fair, and left that determination in place.

High Court · [2022] IEHC 188

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • David McCormack (Appellant)
  • Ashford Castle Hotel Limited (Respondent)
  • Max Barrett (Judge)
What

The court found no error of law in the Labour Court’s decision that the dismissal on capability grounds was fair, and left that determination in place.

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Ashford Castle
When

Judgment:

Other dates in the report
  • 4 October 2017

    Mr McCormack had worked for Ashford Castle since 2003 and became a concierge in 2011. He had been absent from work since 5 November 2014 and was dismissed on 4 October 2017. The judgment records that the hotel wrote to him in August and September 2017 about his position and a possible return to work. It said he made no suggestions in response to the latter letter. He was told he could appeal his dismissal and was invited to an appeal hearing, but did not attend.

  • 17 February 2021

    The Labour Court had dismissed his appeal on 17 February 2021, upholding the Workplace Relations Commission adjudication officer’s decision that his unfair dismissal complaint was not well-founded. The High Court found the legal criteria for dismissal on capability grounds had been met and said there was no basis to overturn the Labour Court determination, numbered UDD2115.

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

The High Court has dismissed David McCormack’s appeal against a Labour Court decision upholding the finding that Ashford Castle Hotel Limited fairly dismissed him because ill-health left him unable to carry out his work. Mr Justice Max Barrett delivered judgment on 24 February 2022.

The High Court has dismissed David McCormack’s appeal against a Labour Court decision upholding the finding that Ashford Castle Hotel Limited fairly dismissed him because ill-health left him unable to carry out his work. Mr Justice Max Barrett delivered judgment on 24 February 2022.

The appeal was on a point of law. The court said it was not retrying the underlying dispute and could not set aside the Labour Court’s factual findings where evidence supported them. It found substantial evidence, including multiple occupational health assessments, for the Labour Court’s conclusion that the hotel honestly believed Mr McCormack was incapable of doing his job because of ill-health.

Mr McCormack had worked for Ashford Castle since 2003 and became a concierge in 2011. He had been absent from work since 5 November 2014 and was dismissed on 4 October 2017. The judgment records that the hotel wrote to him in August and September 2017 about his position and a possible return to work. It said he made no suggestions in response to the latter letter. He was told he could appeal his dismissal and was invited to an appeal hearing, but did not attend.

The court considered a number of points Mr McCormack appeared to raise, including the presentation of medical evidence, the Labour Court’s procedure, the authenticity of its determination, and workplace health and safety. It rejected them, finding no basis to conclude that the Labour Court had acted unfairly or erred in law. The court also said Mr McCormack had not established that his accommodation arrangements were relevant to the appeal.

The Labour Court had dismissed his appeal on 17 February 2021, upholding the Workplace Relations Commission adjudication officer’s decision that his unfair dismissal complaint was not well-founded. The High Court found the legal criteria for dismissal on capability grounds had been met and said there was no basis to overturn the Labour Court determination, numbered UDD2115.

The judgment gives a provisional view that Mr McCormack should pay the costs because his appeal failed. Either party could notify the registrar within 21 days if they disagreed, in which case the court would schedule a brief costs hearing. The judgment does not record a final costs order.

Read the original court judgment

Something looks wrong?

Highlight the relevant passage or flag this article for review. Review requests do not immediately change the report.

Email a correction request

Request a review