Former election candidate claims he was unfairly sacked after whistleblower move

A former byelection candidate’s claims of wrongdoing at his old job are “complete fantasy”, a lawyer for the firm has said.Tony Corrigan, a qualified solicitor who stood as an Independent candidate in the Dublin Central byelection in May, is pursuing employment rights complaints against his former employer, Identity Digital Ltd, at the Workplace Relations Commission.Corrigan, who worked in a legal role at the internet domain registry company, alleges in a complaint under the Unfair Dismissals Act 2014 that he was unfairly sacked in March 2025 because he turned whistleblower the year before.No details of what was claimed by Corrigan in this alleged protected disclosure were discussed at a preliminary hearing on Monday.READ MOREThe hearing dealt with legal argument on which of a series of statutory complaints raised under the Unfair Dismissals Act, the Payment of Wages Act and the Employment Equality Act by Corrigan were properly before the commission.Corrigan said he raised a protected disclosure on June 19th, 2024, and was placed on a performance improvement plan, or “PIP”, on September 10th that year.He said a disciplinary process was initiated against him the day after the PIP started.Having taken a period of sick leave that winter, he said the company failed to discharge salary payments in a period between November 2024 and February 2025.“December [2024], that was pure vindictiveness,” he said. He said that the company paid him “nothing” that month and put him under “extreme pressure ... at the most expensive time of year”.Owen Keany, for the firm, instructed by Sarah Faulkner of Arthur Cox , said Corrigan had made “a series of assertions about alleged wrongdoing on the part of my client” that were “complete fantasy”.He said the company’s actions in relation to non-payment of sick pay were “perfectly lawful steps” taken in what he said were circumstances of “staggering disengagement in the approach adopted by Mr Corrigan”.Keany said that since Corrigan had referred his complaints in September 2025, the alleged non-payment of wages complained of was now beyond the normal six-month time limit for such a complaint.Corrigan argued that the pay matters were a live issue at the time he was dismissed, though adjudication officer Brian Dalton said that “on face value” the pay complaints matters seemed to be out of time. He also said the law precluded Corrigan pursuing a parallel complaint of discriminatory dismissal under the Employment Equality Act at the same time as alleging a breach of the Unfair Dismissals Act.Adjudication officer Brian Dalton said he would arrange for two full days to be set aside to hear evidence on the dispute and adjourned the matter.Corrigan was excluded following the first count in May’s poll, having secured 30 first-preference votes.