|
Powers of rights commissioner, Employment Appeals Tribunal or Labour Court in certain cases.
|
39.—(1) In this section “relevant authority” means a rights commissioner, the Employment Appeals Tribunal or the Labour Court.
|
| |
(2) A decision (by whatever name called) of a relevant authority under this Act or an enactment referred to in the Table to this subsection that does not state correctly the name of the employer concerned or any other material particular may, on application being made in that behalf to the authority by any party concerned, be amended by the authority so as to state correctly the name of the employer concerned or the other material particular.
|
| |
TABLE
|
| |
Adoptive Leave Act, 1995
|
Maternity Protection Act, 1994
|
Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Acts, 1973 to 1991
|
Payment of Wages Act, 1991
|
Protection of Employees (Employers' Insolvency) Acts, 1984 to 1991
|
Protection of Young Persons (Employment) Act, 1996
|
Redundancy Payments Acts, 1967 to 1991
|
Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994
|
Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 to 1993
|
Worker Protection (Regular Part-Time Employees) Act, 1991
|
|
| |
(3) The power of a relevant authority under subsection (2) shall not be exercised if it would result in a person who was not given an opportunity to be heard in the proceedings on foot of which the decision concerned was given becoming the subject of any requirement or direction contained in the decision.
|
| |
(4) If an employee wishes to pursue against a person a claim for relief in respect of any matter under an enactment referred to in subsection (2), or the Table thereto, and has already instituted proceedings under that enactment in respect of that matter, being proceedings in which the said person has not been given an opportunity to be heard and—
|
| |
(a) the fact of the said person not having been given an opportunity to be heard in those proceedings was due to the respondent's name in those proceedings or any other particular necessary to identify the respondent having been incorrectly stated in the notice or other process by which the proceedings were instituted, and
|
| |
(b) the said misstatement was due to inadvertence,
|
| |
then the employee may apply to whichever relevant authority would hear such proceedings in the first instance for leave to institute proceedings against the said person (“the proposed respondent”) in respect of the matter concerned under the said enactment and that relevant authority may grant such leave to the employee notwithstanding that the time specified under the said enactment within which such proceedings may be instituted has expired:
|
| |
Provided that that relevant authority shall not grant such leave to that employee if it is of opinion that to do so would result in an injustice being done to the proposed respondent.
|
| |
(5) References in subsection (4) to the institution of proceedings in respect of any matter under an enactment referred to in subsection (2), or the Table thereto, shall be construed as including references to the presentation of a complaint, or the referral of a dispute, in respect of the said matter, to the relevant authority concerned.
|