Labour Court failed to consider relevant statutory provision in unfair dismissal case

Employment law - appeal on a point of law from the Workplace Relations Commission - teacher began working for the school in August 2013 without a written contract - continued under such arrangement until the commencement of the school year 2015 to 2016 - furnished with a fixed term whole time teacher temporary contract – contract executed - attended a further interview to secure employment for the school year 2016 to 2017, however was unsuccessful as a consequence whereof the teacher maintained a claim that she was unfairly dismissed – school argued the unfair dismissal legislation did not apply – teacher successful – on appeal the Labour Court found that the exclusion provision in the fixed term contract could not be relied upon to preclude the application of the Unfair Dismissals Act and therefore the teacher was unfairly dismissed when her contract was not renewed – waiver of rights – insufficient reasons - relevant statutory provisions – exceptions to the application of the act include fixed term contracts - Labour Court decision – Court did not accept that there was any error of law on the part of the labour court in dealing with the totality of the matter rather than making an initial determination as to whether or not s.2 (2)(b) - no error of law in the consideration of the teacher’s prior employment status – errors of Labour Court not sufficient to vitiate the decision - decision did not refer at all to s.13, nor indeed did it specifically refer to s.2 (2)(b) – arguments about the interplay of those sections cannot be made - not evident from the decision of the labour court as to how the jurisprudence aforesaid in respect of waiver provisions could be deemed to appropriately and comprehensively address the arguments raised by both parties as to the application of the exclusion comprised in s.2 (2)(b) – Court not satisfied that the correct principles of law were applied by the Labour Court – absence of engagement or consideration of the impact of s.2 (2)(b) on the circumstances before the labour court – no evidence Labour Court weighed the balance of the provisions of s.2 (2)(b) – absence of an explanation of the perceived difference between exclusion and waiver identified by the labour court in its and why notwithstanding such difference the jurisprudence in respect of waiver was sufficient to address the critical/central issue between the parties – High Court remitted the case to the Labour Court.