The High Court found that Complex Tooling and Moulding breached its duty as an employer by failing to stop a campaign of workplace bullying that caused Matt Quigley psychiatric injury. Mr Justice Vivian Lavan delivered judgment on 9 March 2005 in a personal injuries action arising from Quigley’s employment.
The judgment accepted Quigley’s evidence that, after the defendant took over the factory business in 1998, plant manager Ron Skinner subjected him to humiliating remarks, repeated scrutiny and criticism. Quigley said he complained to his shop steward and to management, but the conduct continued. The court heard supporting evidence from nine fellow workers. The defendant denied that the treatment amounted to harassment or bullying and argued that the incidents were isolated and did not cause the claimed injury. It did not call Skinner or other management witnesses, apart from its human resources director.
The court found that Quigley had been singled out for unfair treatment and that the conduct amounted to a campaign of bullying, rather than isolated incidents. It accepted evidence that he developed depression as a result. The judgment found that the employer’s failure to act after being told of the bullying fell below the standard of a reasonable and prudent employer and caused personal injury.
The court also considered the effect of Quigley’s earlier unfair dismissal proceedings. A Rights Commissioner had recommended re-engagement, and the Employment Appeals Tribunal rejected the employer’s appeal and ordered re-engagement after finding the dismissal unfair. The High Court held that the personal injury claim for harm caused by workplace harassment was a separate cause of action, which had not been determined by the Tribunal. The judgment noted that damages for wrongful dismissal could not be claimed in these proceedings.
However, the court declined to award €20,816.16 claimed for lost earnings to the date of redundancy, because that loss had already been covered in the Tribunal proceedings. It awarded €773.94 for medical expenses. The judgment did not state a further general damages figure in the supplied text.