Children’s charity Barnardos has been accused of attempting to employ a “technical legal argument” in a “ploy” to shut down a long-running employment rights dispute after the claimant was given an adjournment when her father died.
At the Workplace Relations Commission today, the charity’s lawyers moved an application that a complaint under the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977 brought by the worker, Tara Smith be “dismissed for want of prosecution” without hearing her evidence.
Ms Smith was let go by the charity in January 2021 on the basis of redundancy – a termination she argues was unfair.
Objecting to the motion today, Ms Smith’s representative, industrial relations consultant John Keenan, said his client had already been “closed down” once before when her complaint was first listed.
“I think it’s quite a disgraceful move by the respondent…. I think it’s appalling that such an application would be made,” he said.
“A pre-emptory decision was issued by the WRC and we had to go to the High Court to have it quashed in order to have these proceedings, and for my client to be heard,” he said, referencing a hearing in 2022. “The fact of it is, my client was not heard,” he said.
Barrister Emma Davey BL, appearing instructed by Beauchamps Solicitors for Barnardos, objected to the reference to a previous hearing. Mr Keenan said it was “a matter of public record”.
“We’ve come here looking for fairness and justice; that’s what the legislation and this commission is designed to provide. To point a finger at us and say we’re inactive is without foundation. We had to go to the High Court to talk today,” he said.
Adjudicator Kara Turner said she was aware it was common case the matter was part-heard before another adjudication officer.
“Who’s no longer an adjudication officer,” Mr Keenan remarked.
Ms Davey said what Mr Keenan was prejudicial and she hoped they had “gone in one ear and out the other” for Ms Turner.
A hearing scheduled for 14 November 2024 into Ms Smith’s complaints was postponed that morning by the WRC, she said. “It wasn’t on consent. It wasn’t even on notice to us,” she said.
“My dad died the day before,” Ms Smith said.
Advancing the motion, Ms Davey said Ms Smith had her “sincere condolences” but added: “My issue is, we didn’t have any pre-warning.” Quoting correspondence from the WRC, she said the charity was told the WRC “will contact you shortly with arrangements for a new hearing”.
It was one year and 12 days later that the WRC wrote again setting a new hearing date, she submitted. She argued the legislation governing the proceedings provided for the dismissal of a complaint if there was a failure to pursue it for 12 calendar months.
A human resources manager, Barbara Dempsey, as well as Ms Smith’s former line manager, Sharon Moore, would have been relevant witnesses but had both left the charity’s employment in 2022, Ms Davey said. A senior manager who “had a lot of involvement”, Siobhán Greene, had “passed away in October 2025”.
Barnardos was “placed at a considerable disadvantage” in defending the case due to “the complainant’s delay”, Ms Davey further submitted.
After further discussion of the case law in the area, and a recess, Mr Keenan addressed the hearing and said: “I think it’s quite a disgraceful move by the respondent.”
He said he offered his condolences in relation to Ms Greene, the late senior manager, but said that a “main player” in his client’s redundancy, Claire Deane, was present in the hearing room.
Mr Keenan said the complainant had “relied on the advice from the Commission” when the case was put back in November 2024, when he said the WRC “undertook to contact us in relation to new hearing arrangements”.
“It is the normal course that parties would rely on the good offices of the Commission to order their affairs in such a way that it might be as expeditious as possible.
“If there was any delay, we say it is nothing to do with us, it is down to the WRC,” he said.
Later, he said he wanted to make a “direct appeal” that the application for strike-out be withdrawn. Mr Keenan said that a “technical legal argument” was being used as “a ploy to shut this case down”.
Ms Davey took issue with the language used and said the position the respondent was advancing was “entirely allowed within the statute”.
Even if the fault lay with the WRC, the prejudice to Barnardos’s defence of the complaint “doesn’t fall away” Ms Davey said – calling it “insurmountable”.
The case has been adjourned for an exchange of written legal submissions on Ms Davey’s application.
Reporting by Stephen Bourke
