This year’s award builds on a strong tradition of success for the firm at the Irish Law Awards. Over the past decade, Alastair Purdy LLP has consistently been recognised among Ireland’s leading employment law practices, including:

• Employment Law Firm of the Year 2022

• Multiple regional awards for Employment Law Firm in Connacht and Ulster (2015, 2018, 2019, 2021, 2023, 2024 and 2025)

These accolades are a testament to the trust placed in us by our clients and the efforts of our exceptional team, whose expertise supports businesses across Ireland in navigating complex workplace challenges.

We extend our thanks to the organisers of the Irish Law Awards, the judging panel, and most importantly, our clients and colleagues for their continued support.

For more information about our employment law services, or to speak with a member of our team, please contact us today.

The post Alastair Purdy LLP Named National Employment Law Firm of the Year 2025 appeared first on Alastair Purdy LLP | Employment Law Firm Ireland | Irish Legal Advice.

Firstly, we are proud to have been named the Regional Employment Law Firm for Connacht/Ulster for the seventh year in a row. This continued recognition underscores our unwavering commitment to providing top-tier employment law services and our expertise in supporting businesses across Ireland.

Secondly, and for the first time, we have been awarded the title of Regional Law Firm of the Year for Connacht/Ulster. This accolade recognizes our broad legal proficiency and the exceptional quality of service we offer across all our practice areas.

These awards are a reflection of the relentless dedication and hard work of our team, as well as the trust and loyalty of our clients. We extend our heartfelt thanks to all our clients, partners, and staff for their continued support.

As we celebrate these achievements, we remain committed to delivering outstanding legal services and upholding the highest standards of excellence in all that we do.

Thank you for being a part of our success.

The post Alastair Purdy LLP. Solicitors Celebrates Double Win at the Dye and Durham Irish Law Awards 2024 appeared first on Alastair Purdy LLP | Employment Law Firm Ireland | Irish Legal Advice.

Background

The incident occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic on the 2^nd of February 2021. Upon entering the Respondent’s retail store, the Complainant was asked by security to wear a face mask. The Complainant refused to do so on the basis that he was exempt due to medical conditions. The Respondent refused to assist the Complainant unless he provided proof of exemption. The Complainant left the premises and later returned with a copy of S.I. 296 of Government Regulation 2020 referencing the part that mandates the wearing of facemasks on certain premises, and in particular section 5 that deals with reasonable excuses/exemptions. Once again, the Respondent refused to grant an exemption without proof.

The Complainant brought a discrimination claim against the Respondent under Section 21 of the Equal Status Act 2000 (” 2000 Act”) which provides ‘’that a person who claims that prohibited conduct has been directed against him or her may seek redress by referring the case to the Director.’’ The Complainant submitted that the incident contravened the 2000 Act as he had been subject to direct discrimination on grounds of disability and indirect discrimination through the Respondent’s failure to provide reasonable accommodation.

Legal Arguments

The Respondent made reference to a recent decision that was on all fours with this case. In Anthony Lyttle v Buywise Discount Stores Costcutter North Strand, the complainant was unsuccessful in arguing that he had been discriminated against on grounds of disability when he was denied access to a service following his refusal to wear a face covering. Akin to the present case, the complainant refused to offer proof of exemption.

Legal Reasoning

Firstly, the Adjudicator was not willing to engage in an interpretation of and potential breach of S.I. 296 as the WRC is not the correct platform for such. Secondly, in regard to the argument of a failure to provide reasonable accommodation, the Adjudicator explained that once a complainant is alleging discrimination on grounds of a disability, then where the claim to have a disability is disputed, medical evidence must be provided to support the claim under the 2000 Act. The Complainant did not submit medical evidence to support his claim. In addition, the Adjudicator clarified that this did not amount to an invasion of privacy but rather it is imperative in order to allow the Adjudicator to make a decision on the discrimination claim. Finally, while the Complainant pursued this complaint before the WRC, in the first instance prior to the hearing he neglected to bring this attention to the Respondent. The Adjudicator explained that where a person is seeking a reasonable accommodation for the purposes of a claim of discrimination they would be expected to notify the other party and to provide that party with an opportunity to consider the specific request and to respond. The Complainant’s claim was not upheld.

Key Takeaways for Employers

The pandemic has forced retailers to restructure their businesses in order to keep both employees and customers safe from the COVID-19 virus. Without proof of exemption from complying with safety guidelines or proof of impairment, an employer can continue to require compliance from both employees and customers, which includes the wearing of face masks.

Links to case: https://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/cases/2022/february/adj-00032638.html

Further link to other successful defence in this area: https://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/cases/2022/april/adj-00032055.html

Link to Irish Independent Article: ‘A waste of time for all concerned’ – man who refused to wear face mask in hardware store during lockdown loses discrimination cases – Independent.ie

The post Alastair Purdy LLP., successfully defends claim of discrimination from man refusing to wear a mask appeared first on Alastair Purdy LLP | Employment Law Firm Ireland | Irish Legal Advice.

Background

In this case, the Complainant commenced employment with the Respondent in June 2018. In May 2020, the Complainant issued his resignation to the Respondent, having accepted a job offer from another company. During his employment, he engaged in training and development, the cost of which was covered by the Respondent. Having left his employment early, his contract now permitted the Respondent to make deductions to recoup the losses of the training. The Respondent made a deduction of €2,916.67 from his wages.

The Complainant brought an action before the WRC claiming unpaid wages and presented his claim under Section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act 1991 (“1991 Act”) on grounds that his employer has contravened Section 5 of the 1991 Act, which prohibits an employer from making a deduction unless the deduction falls within one of the exceptions under Section 5.

Legal Arguments

The Respondent argued that the deduction was not unlawful as Section 5 of the 1991 Act permits a deduction where it is authorised by a term of the employee’s contract of employment. In support of their argument, the Respondent referred to two clauses in particular from the Complainant’s contract of employment. The first clause presented requires the Complainant to undertake significant training and development as part of which, the Respondent would cover the costs subject to a number of conditions, the primary of which, clearly stated that if the Complainant was to leave his employment within the first 24 months, the Respondent would be entitled to recoup 50% of the costs incurred by them. The second clause referred to a general right the Respondent had to make any appropriate deductions from the Complainant’s salary. The Complainant disputed the right of the Respondent to deduct from his wages under both contractual clauses.

Legal Reasoning

The WRC held the Complainant’s claim under Section 6 of the 1991 Act was not well-founded and, therefore, not upheld. The WRC found that the Respondent had complied with Section 5 (i), (ii), (iii) and (v) of the 1991 Act as the deduction was authorised by virtue of a term within his contract of employment, which he had signed upon commencement. Importantly, the Adjudicator noted that the amount deducted was reflective of the costs incurred.

Key Takeaways for Employers:

This case reaffirms that an employer may lawfully deduct training and development costs from an employee salary, provided there is a contractual provision permitting such. However it is recommend where the costs of the training and development are significant, it is prudent that an employer enter into separate and individual agreement with the employee in question so that the precise clawback mechanisms can be clearly defined. In the absence of such, an employer risks a claim being brought against them before the WRC for an unlawful deduction of wages.

Link to case: https://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/cases/2022/march/adj-00029801.html

The post Alastair Purdy LLP, successfully defends claim of unlawful deduction in wages before the WRC appeared first on Alastair Purdy LLP | Employment Law Firm Ireland | Irish Legal Advice.

The post Alastair Purdy LLP secures award of €75,000 before the Labour Court for failing to provide reasonable accommodation appeared first on Alastair Purdy LLP | Employment Law Firm Ireland | Irish Legal Advice.

The post Alastair Purdy LLP awarded Employment Law Firm of the year for Connacht & Ulster for third successive year appeared first on Alastair Purdy LLP | Employment Law Firm Ireland | Irish Legal Advice.

ISO 9001 is an independent, non-governmental internal organisation with a membership of 165 national bodies. Through its members, it brings together experts to share knowledge and develop voluntary, consensus-based, market relevant International Standards that support innovation and provide solutions to global challenges.

ISO 9001 sets out the criteria for a quality management system. This standard is based on a number of quality management principles including a strong customer focus, the motivation and implication of top management, the process approach and continual improvement. These principles are explained in more detail in ISO’s quality management principles. Using ISO 9001 helps ensure that customers get consistent, good-quality products and services, which in turn brings many business benefits.

The post Alastair Purdy LLP passes ISO 9001 Audit for 12th successive year appeared first on Alastair Purdy LLP | Employment Law Firm Ireland | Irish Legal Advice.

Even amidst the current restrictions, our firm was in a position to complete yet another share purchase in 2021 remotely.

The post Alastair Purdy LLP advises on the purchase of leading security service business appeared first on Alastair Purdy LLP | Employment Law Firm Ireland | Irish Legal Advice.

A new Act was introduced in Ireland some time ago entitled the Land and Conveyancing Law Reform Act, 2009. This piece of legislation brought in many changes to the law relating to the acquisition of a legal term that is know as “Easements” obtained via long usage. The most common easement found in reality are rights of way or wayleaves. A right of way is the entitlement to continue to pass and repass over land that you do not own. A wayleave is the right to ongoing access to lands that you do not own to maintain a service that runs through your own lands. Prior to the aforementioned 2009 Act, a right of way could be granted either formally in writing by the owner of land to which you pass over and these may or may not be registered on the title. The second method of acquiring a right of way was if the access over that piece of land had been established by “long usage”.

Previously, in order to establish a right of way, you must prove that you had used same for in excess of 20 years (this may longer if the land in question was state owned). If you were therefore selling property that you owned and you were advertising same as having the benefit of a right of way, it was sufficient for you to swear a formal statutory declaration declaring this. Following the enactment of the Land and Conveyancing Law Reform Act, 2009, it became necessary to register such rights in the Property Registration Authority. The Act also changed the rules as to how to apply for Easements obtained by long usage. The “sting in the tail” was that any time built up showing long usage prior to the 2009 Act will, on the 1st of December, 2011 be extinguished and it is only time of which the Easement has been used since the 2009 Act that will be taken into account following any application post the 31st of November, 2021.

It is therefore important to use these last remaining months to “put in order” any rights of way that has been established and that you are relying on prior to the end of November, 2021. The application is made in the manner of a form submitted to the Property Registration Authority along with the necessary proofs. This can be a long and drawn out application however it is well worth the time to consider same especially if the right of way is necessary to access your property or indeed if the lands which you are traversing are state owned. Should you have any queries in this regard please contact the Property Solicitors within this firm.

The post Deadline to register right of ways approaches – 31st November 2021 appeared first on Alastair Purdy LLP | Employment Law Firm Ireland | Irish Legal Advice.

Midway through the investigation, it was also discovered that the employee had left a “cheat sheet” with step by step guidance on how to access the organizations secured data underneath a laptop in a meeting room in which 3rd party members had access to.

Following the investigation and disciplinary meetings, whilst having regard to the potential severity of the employees actions and the importance of data security within financial institutions, the Credit Union took the decision to dismiss the employee.

At the WRC, the employee submitted that at no stage did realise that he would be dismissed and that if he had been aware of such , he would have made a stronger case. In response, the Credit Union noted the employees right to fair procedures were adhered to throughout with the provision of an independent investigation, notice of the allegations, ample opportunity to make submission in regards to the allegations, numerous documentation concerning the allegations, right to representation and a right of appeal.

In her decision, the adjudicator, Ms. Catherine Byrne, found that the Credit Union’s decision to dismiss was reasonable when having regard to particular circumstances before the parties. The adjudicator noted that the employee had been sufficiently qualified and afforded substantial training and that he seemed unable to comprehend the severity of his actions despite being fully aware of the potential consequences that may have flowed his actions.

In deeming the dismissal to be fair, the adjudicator drew particular focus to the employees failure to exhaust all internal procedures and that he should have utilised his right of appeal internally prior to lodging his complaint before the WRC.

The post Alastair Purdy successfully proves that dismissal of IT Officer was proportionate appeared first on Alastair Purdy LLP | Employment Law Firm Ireland | Irish Legal Advice.