Two Circuit Court orders, made in the cases of Bright and Corbett v Paintridge Ltd trading as Boston Brand Bars have been described as enforcing Labour Court decisions on foot of appeals of two Rights Commissioners’ recommendations made pursuant to the provisions of the 1969 Act.
The orders have been referred to in some quarters as a legal “first”, and it has been noted that section 13 of the Industrial Relations (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2004 provides for binding orders to be made from the Circuit Court in relation to other employment rights legislation but that the 1969 Act was never considered to operate in the same manner. Section 13 of the 2004 Act provides for the enforcement of decisions under sections 9 and 10 of that Act, dealing with victimisation by reason of trade union membership or activity, which did not appear to feature in the two cases referred to above.
Any other employment rights legislation which is considered legally binding contains the necessary provision conferring power of enforcement of the decision on the Circuit Court. In fact, the Industrial Relations Act 1969 contains no provision for legal enforcement by the Circuit Court of recommendations of Rights Commissioners or decisions of the Labour Court. In this respect, the 1969 Act, and decisions made pursuant to its provisions, are considered binding in an industrial relations sense only.
Wednesday, 25 March 2015