The High Court struck out a judicial review brought by Naisiúnta Leictreach Conraitheoir Éireann against the Labour Court after an application for a Sectoral Employment Order in the electrical contracting industry was withdrawn. Ms Justice O’Regan ruled on 5 July 2018 that the withdrawal left no live issue with potential legal consequences between the parties.
The notice parties had applied to the Labour Court under section 14 of the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act 2015. The applicant obtained leave to bring judicial review proceedings on 31 July 2017, challenging how the Labour Court would examine whether to recommend an order to the Minister. It secured an injunction on 28 August 2017 restraining the examination. The notice parties withdrew their application on or about 4 October 2017, so the examination would not proceed.
The applicant argued that parts of its challenge remained significant because it anticipated another order application around September 2018. It sought orders requiring the Labour Court to explain its compliance with statutory conditions, identify the relevant economic sector, define “substantially representative”, assess the representative status of employer bodies and the Technical Engineering and Electrical Union, and provide for a public hearing.
The Labour Court argued that the withdrawal ended the examination and that several requested rulings would be abstract or hypothetical. The judge agreed. She said the applicant’s case depended on assumptions about a future application and the process that might be adopted. The 2015 Act applies across industrial sectors, and the court was not being asked to decide an issue of exceptional public importance with special public-interest reasons for continuing.
The judge held that the requests tied to the withdrawn examination had fallen away. She also found that defining “substantially representative” or deciding which bodies met that standard without a particular examination would be abstract, as would deciding in advance whether a public hearing should be held. The court’s decision addressed whether this judicial review could continue; it did not decide the merits of any future order application.
Finding the issues moot, with no exceptional public importance or special public-interest reason to proceed, the court ordered the proceedings struck out.