- Bitcoin Casinos
- Real Money Casinos
- Strategy Guides
- Sweepstakes Casinos
- US Online Casinos
- Free Slots
- Ancient Slots
- Animal Slots
- Asian Slots
- Classic Slots
- Food Slots
- Gold Slots
- Jungle Slots
- Magic Slots
- Sports Slots
- Slot Developers
- Betting Sites
- Legal States
Deyan Dimitrov December 8, 2023 3 min read
Legal Battle in the Gambling Industry: Threats of Withdrawal over Fair Hearing Concerns
Conall McSorley’s case against software firm GBE Technologies Unlimited has turned heads as the legal battle heats up
In a tense twist at the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC), lawyers representing a senior sales executive in the gambling industry have hinted at withdrawing from a case due to their client potentially being denied a fair hearing. Conall McSorley, a veteran in the horseracing and gambling sector, alleges unfair dismissal, but the two sides’ conflicting stories have caused quite a stir.
A Sudden Termination Prompted Legal Action
McSorley’s standing as an employee of GBE Technologies versus a contractor is central to the case. The company argues that McSorley was never an employee, categorizing his role as a contractor on a daily rate. Conversely, McSorley’s lawyers contend that his relationship with the firm mirrored an employment arrangement, pointing to his annual remuneration and extensive involvement with the company since February 2018.
The contentious nature of the case deepened during cross-examination, where McSorley detailed his sudden termination following a meeting with a company director. The conflicting testimonies revolve around McSorley’s exact role, including work hours and payment structures. The plaintiff’s LinkedIn profile states that he worked for the Dublin-based company until 2022 before moving on to his current position at live betting services provider SIS.
Proceedings Will Carry On into 2024
According to an Irish Times report, the courtroom drama unfolded as McSorley’s defense team voiced objections during Wednesday’s proceedings, raising concerns about questions posed to a chief executive officer related to management control over McSorley’s work. This line of questioning had not been addressed during McSorley’s cross-examination, prompting objections and casting doubt on the fairness of the proceedings.
McSorley refused to reenter evidence to allow the firm an opportunity to rectify what his legal team deemed procedural irregularities. Adrian Twomey, solicitor for GBE Technologies, insisted that McSorley’s evidence confirmed his status as a contractor and, hence, not an employee under legal definitions, challenging the WRC’s jurisdiction over the matter.
Based on the complainant’s own evidence, he wasn’t an employee within the definition of that term for the purposes of the acts.Adrian Twomey, solicitor for GBE Technologies
In response, Jason Murray BL, representing McSorley, contested the move to dismiss the case, emphasizing that the hearing shouldn’t be prematurely terminated based on disputed interpretations of McSorley’s employment status. The proceedings took a dramatic turn when McSorley’s legal team threatened withdrawal from the case, citing concerns over fair procedure and breach of constitutional rights.
Carefully considering the two sides’ conflicting statements, adjudicating officer Penelope McGrath adjourned the session, asking for written submissions to address the unfolding legal complexity, pushing the resolution of the matter into the new year, and vacating further scheduled hearings this week. From an outside perspective, this case does not appear to carry any broader implications, as both parties seem to have largely moved on with their ventures.