Judgment: 2025-11-27 · Court archive

High Court refuses Waterford logistics managing director’s bid to reverse reporting changes

High Court · [2025] IEHC 653

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • John Paul Kelly
  • Store All Logistics
  • Mr Justice Liam Kennedy
  • Derek Dalton
What

High Court refuses Waterford logistics managing director’s bid to reverse reporting changes

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Waterford
When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

Mr Justice Liam Kennedy found that Mr Kelly had established a strong case that the April 2025 restructuring fundamentally altered his role and may have breached his employment contract. However, the judge held that the balance of justice did not favour restoring the previous arrangements before the case is finally decided.

The High Court has refused an application by Store All Logistics managing director John Paul Kelly to reverse changes to management reporting lines at the Waterford-based company pending a full trial.

Mr Justice Liam Kennedy found that Mr Kelly had established a strong case that the April 2025 restructuring fundamentally altered his role and may have breached his employment contract. However, the judge held that the balance of justice did not favour restoring the previous arrangements before the case is finally decided.

Store All Logistics employs about 170 people. Mr Kelly has worked there since 1999, became managing director in 2022 and holds an indirect 17.5% stake following a management buyout. The remaining shares are beneficially owned by members of the Dalton family.

The dispute intensified after the company’s Food and Warehouse Manager resigned in March 2025 and blamed Mr Kelly. At a board meeting which Mr Kelly did not attend on 7 April, directors changed reporting lines so that most of the senior leadership team would report through director Derek Dalton rather than directly to Mr Kelly.

Mr Kelly argued that the changes effectively demoted and sidelined him, amounted to punishment without fair procedures and formed part of an attempt to replace him as managing director. The company denied those claims and said restructuring was needed to give senior managers more autonomy and address strained working relationships.

The judge found a strong case that the changes were so extensive that Mr Kelly retained the managing director title without the powers and information needed to perform the role. He also found a strong case that he had not been provided with information an MD could reasonably expect to receive.

But the court said restoring uncertain pre-April arrangements could damage the company, its workforce and already strained relationships. Mr Kelly remains employed as managing director on full salary, and any proven contractual breach can be compensated by damages.

The application was therefore dismissed. The judge said he may make narrower orders requiring timely provision of information to Mr Kelly if suitable arrangements cannot be agreed, with the matter listed for final orders on 10 December 2025.

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