爱尔兰的举报诉讼和立法:有什么值得借鉴的?

IF 1 4区 社会学 Q3 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR
Lauren Kierans
{"title":"爱尔兰的举报诉讼和立法:有什么值得借鉴的?","authors":"Lauren Kierans","doi":"10.1093/indlaw/dwad009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The Protected Disclosures Act 2014 is Ireland’s main workplace whistleblowing legislation. It will be amended by the Protected Disclosures (Amendment) Act 2022 on 1 January 2023 on foot of Ireland’s obligation to transpose into national law Directive 2019/1937/EU of the European Parliament and the Council of 23 October 2019 on the protection of persons who report breaches of Union law. This paper addresses the question of whether, in amending the 2014 Act, there were lessons that could have been learnt from the experience in the UK in the operation of its whistleblowing legislation. In answering this question, the findings of an analysis of the case law under the 2014 Act between 15 July 2014 and 15 July 2020 are presented and discussed. In conducting the case law analysis, specific issues were assessed, including, procedural issues concerning the forum for the taking of a claim, costs, fees, processing times, and time limits for presenting penalisation claims and substantive issues regarding the type of claim and the success rate. The research established that there are deficiencies in the 2014 Act, and in some of its amendments under the 2022 Act. It also established that there is an inequity in the treatment under the legislation of ‘employees’ and workers other than employees. The author concludes that to address these procedural and substantive deficiencies and inequities, Ireland should have gone beyond the minimum standards of the Directive and looked to the UK for guidance.","PeriodicalId":45482,"journal":{"name":"Industrial Law Journal","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Whistleblowing Litigation and Legislation in Ireland: Are There Lessons to be Learned?\",\"authors\":\"Lauren Kierans\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/indlaw/dwad009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n The Protected Disclosures Act 2014 is Ireland’s main workplace whistleblowing legislation. It will be amended by the Protected Disclosures (Amendment) Act 2022 on 1 January 2023 on foot of Ireland’s obligation to transpose into national law Directive 2019/1937/EU of the European Parliament and the Council of 23 October 2019 on the protection of persons who report breaches of Union law. This paper addresses the question of whether, in amending the 2014 Act, there were lessons that could have been learnt from the experience in the UK in the operation of its whistleblowing legislation. In answering this question, the findings of an analysis of the case law under the 2014 Act between 15 July 2014 and 15 July 2020 are presented and discussed. In conducting the case law analysis, specific issues were assessed, including, procedural issues concerning the forum for the taking of a claim, costs, fees, processing times, and time limits for presenting penalisation claims and substantive issues regarding the type of claim and the success rate. The research established that there are deficiencies in the 2014 Act, and in some of its amendments under the 2022 Act. It also established that there is an inequity in the treatment under the legislation of ‘employees’ and workers other than employees. The author concludes that to address these procedural and substantive deficiencies and inequities, Ireland should have gone beyond the minimum standards of the Directive and looked to the UK for guidance.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45482,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Industrial Law Journal\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Industrial Law Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/indlaw/dwad009\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Industrial Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/indlaw/dwad009","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

《2014年信息披露保护法》是爱尔兰主要的工作场所举报立法。根据爱尔兰有义务将欧洲议会和理事会2019年10月23日关于保护举报违反欧盟法律的人的第2019/1937/EU号指令转化为国家法律,爱尔兰将于2023年1月1日根据《2022年受保护披露(修正案)法》对其进行修订。本文探讨的问题是,在修改2014年法案的过程中,是否可以从英国举报立法的运作中吸取教训。在回答这个问题时,本文介绍并讨论了2014年7月15日至2020年7月15日期间2014年法案下的判例法分析结果。在进行判例法分析时,评估了具体问题,包括关于受理索赔的地点、费用、费用、处理时间和提出处罚索赔的时限的程序问题,以及关于索赔类型和成功率的实质性问题。研究表明,2014年法案和2022年法案下的一些修正案存在缺陷。它还确定,在“雇员”和雇员以外的工人的法律待遇方面存在不平等。作者的结论是,为了解决这些程序性和实质性的缺陷和不公平,爱尔兰应该超越指令的最低标准,并向英国寻求指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Whistleblowing Litigation and Legislation in Ireland: Are There Lessons to be Learned?
The Protected Disclosures Act 2014 is Ireland’s main workplace whistleblowing legislation. It will be amended by the Protected Disclosures (Amendment) Act 2022 on 1 January 2023 on foot of Ireland’s obligation to transpose into national law Directive 2019/1937/EU of the European Parliament and the Council of 23 October 2019 on the protection of persons who report breaches of Union law. This paper addresses the question of whether, in amending the 2014 Act, there were lessons that could have been learnt from the experience in the UK in the operation of its whistleblowing legislation. In answering this question, the findings of an analysis of the case law under the 2014 Act between 15 July 2014 and 15 July 2020 are presented and discussed. In conducting the case law analysis, specific issues were assessed, including, procedural issues concerning the forum for the taking of a claim, costs, fees, processing times, and time limits for presenting penalisation claims and substantive issues regarding the type of claim and the success rate. The research established that there are deficiencies in the 2014 Act, and in some of its amendments under the 2022 Act. It also established that there is an inequity in the treatment under the legislation of ‘employees’ and workers other than employees. The author concludes that to address these procedural and substantive deficiencies and inequities, Ireland should have gone beyond the minimum standards of the Directive and looked to the UK for guidance.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
20.00%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: Industrial Law Journal is established as the leading periodical in its field, providing comment and in-depth analysis on a wide range of topics relating to employment law. It is essential reading for practising lawyers, academics, and lay industrial relations experts to keep abreast of newly enacted legislation and proposals for law reform. In addition Industrial Law Journal carries commentary on relevant government publications and reviews of books relating to labour law.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信