A High Court action brought by a senior executive with an aircraft leasing firm aimed at preventing his employer from sanctioning him has been resolved.
Mr Justice Mark Sanfey was told that proceedings brought by Brian Fitzpatrick against his employer, Bocomm Aviation Leasing Ireland Company Limited, had been settled on confidential terms.
The court previously heard that the dispute arose following the employer's alleged demand that he work several days a week from its Dublin office and not spend all his time working remotely from his Co Clare home.
Mr Fitzpatrick has been employed as a Senior Vice President of the company, which is headquartered in Shanghai, China, and has total aircraft assets of $14 billion (€13 billion).
He claimed that before that demand was made the company had never had an issue with him working from his home at Danganbrack, Quin in Co Clare, which he has done for several years.
Last August he claimed that completely out of the blue he was made the subject of a disciplinary process over his alleged refusal to work from the Dublin office.
He also rejected his employer's claims that he was required under company policy to work from the Dublin office and claims that the company had wrongfully refused to pay him his annual six-figure bonus.
Represented by Gary McCarthy SC, with Jack Nicholas BL instructed by O'Gorman solicitors, Mr Fitzpatrick had sought various orders, including an injunction restraining his employer from imposing a sanction on him, from continuing a purported investigation into allegations against him and from interfering with the terms of his employment.
He further sought an order requiring the defendant to pay him all salary and benefits including his annual bonus, under his contract of employment.
The defendant, represented by Mairead McKenna SC, denied any wrongdoing and had opposed the application.
The case which first came before the court in February was adjourned to allow for out of court settlement talks between the parties.
On Friday, Mr McCarthy told Mr Justice Sanfey that as part of the settlement the parties had agreed to withdraw sworn statements which they had filed as part of the action.
The judge said he was not sure what that exactly meant in practical terms, describing it as an attempt to "unscramble an egg".
However, the court made the order on the basis it had been agreed between the parties following lengthy negotiations to resolve the matter.
Seeking the injunction, counsel said that for many years Mr Fitzpatrick has worked remotely and from his home in Co Clare, and before the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic.
It was claimed that after the demand that he work from the Dublin office was made, he was made the subject of an internal investigation.
He rejected any wrongdoing.
It was also claimed that the company also informed Mr Fitzpatrick that he would not be paid his annual bonus which was generally over €200,000, the court heard.
