AIT Architecture Ltd (Meitheal Design Partners) Are Ripoff Artists Review 2023

Patrick O’Toole Abusing PR Manager Mercilessly

An architect firm’s marketing and public relations manager filed a High Court lawsuit to stop his employment from being terminated.


AIT Architecture

Gregory Higgins, who was engaged as the marketing and PR manager of AIT Architecture Ltd, doing business as Meitheal Design Partners, last year, brought the lawsuit.

Did You Know?

PR agencies are Public Representatives for public figures. They are most focused on creating a favorable online image of their clients. The PR agencies contribute to the media gatherings and the favoring newspapers headlines. 

Although the defendant’s main office is located in Cork City’s South Mall, its registered address is in Kenmare, County Kerry.

The unilateral termination of Mr. Higgins’ job, according to the Cork resident from Courthill, Lyre, and Carrignavar, is both improper and in violation of his contractual rights.

The business reportedly rejected his accusations and asserted that his job was legitimately terminated in court.

Additionally, it asserts that despite the defendant’s best efforts, a number of problems developed that led to his alleged termination.

A strong response will be taken to any interference with the firm’s brand, reputation, or profile, the defendant’s attorneys have also told Mr. Higgins.

Mr. Higgins claims he cannot comprehend the defendant’s suggestions and rejects any accusations of impropriety.

For Mr. Higgins, Mark Connaughton SC stated that his client’s claim that he is entitled to an indefinite-term contract is valid.

His client was needed to complete a three-month probationary period of employment before beginning work for the company in May 2021.

It was over in August of last year.

His company didn’t conduct a review, and lawyers claimed Mr. Higgins kept up with his responsibilities without making any complaints or receiving any negative feedback.

However, from September through December of last year, issues occurred with the firm director.

Mr. Higgins said in a sworn declaration to the court that the problems included the fact that the company’s director Patrick O’Toole had unjustly placed the blame on him in regard to the renewal of the company’s insurance.

The renewal of the policy, according to Mr. Higgins, was not within his purview.

Mr. Higgins claimed that Mr. O’Toole also criticized his written communication and pointed out spelling errors in a paper that he claimed to have not made.

According to him, Mr. O’Toole ordered that “any future spelling mistakes would be punished by chopping off fingers” after asking whether there was “a guillotine within the office” in the open office.

Additionally, Mr. O’Toole enforced a “non-fragrance policy” in the workplace and warned personnel that they would “face disciplinary action” if they “wore a perfume.”

According to Mr. Higgins, O’Toole informed him that the person would “be ejected through a window” if he discovered them “wearing Lynx.

Mr. Higgins claimed in his declaration that Mr. O’Toole chastised him for failing to make corporate announcements public.

He claimed that Mr. O’Toole once expressed uncertainty about the plaintiff’s activities over the previous six months at the company.

Mr. Higgins claimed that as a result of these and other occurrences, he had to take some time off work due to illness.

Late last month, according to Mr. Higgins, he received word that his employment would not be extended past a lengthy probationary term by the corporation.

He alleges that the corporation never extended his probationary period. He asserts that he was not given the chance to explain the situation and was not given a rationale or a fair trial.

He could not appeal the choice because no inquiry was ever done.

He asserts that his employment with the corporation became permanent after the three-month probationary period was over.
The defendant is attempting to get around the explicit restrictions of his employment contract by referring to an extended probationary period.

Mr. Higgins requests orders preventing the defendant from ending his employment and prohibiting the defendant from appointing anybody else to perform his tasks at the company.

Additionally, he asks the court to issue a declaration that his job is legitimate, that it does not exist, and that the decision to fire him was made in error and has no legal standing.

On Wednesday, the matter was heard by Mr. Justice Senan Allen.

The judge authorized Mr. Higgins to provide the defendant company with a brief notice of the proceedings on an ex-parte (one side only) basis.

The judge stated that at this point in the proceedings, he was not willing to issue an injunction barring the defendant from appointing anyone else to do his tasks.

The judge noted Mr. Higgins’ worries stemmed from a company advertisement published in December, which stated that someone else would be hired to fill his position.

The judge, however, claimed that the requested order’s phrasing was “too broad” and that the court was unwilling to award it on an ex-parte basis.

The case was postponed for a week after the judge determined that the matter should have a brief return date.

Settled The Matter Out Of Court After The Media Picked It Up

A marketing and public relations manager who didn’t want to lose his job at an architecture firm went to court. The case has now been settled.

Gregory Higgins filed the suit. Last year, he was hired by AIT Architecture Ltd, which does business as Meitheal Design Partners.

Last month, he asked the court to stop the defendant company from ending his employment contract and from hiring someone else to do his job at the firm. This was done on an ex-parte basis, which means that only one side was represented.

AIT Architecture Ltd

At that point, Mr. Justice Senan Allen gave him permission to give the company short notice of the proceedings. The judge said that at this point in the case, he was not ready to issue an injunction that would stop the defendant from appointing anyone else to do his job.

When the case came back to court on Wednesday, Mark Connaughton SC, who was representing Mr. Higgins, said that everything had been settled in a way that was good for both sides. He said that both sides agreed that the case should be thrown out without any orders.

Before the court, no more information about the deal was given.

Ms. Justice Emily Egan agreed that the case should be thrown out.

Before, the court heard that Mr. Higgins from Courthill, Lyre, Carrignavar, Cork, said that the company’s sudden decision to end his job as a marketing and public relations manager was both unprofessional and a violation of his rights under the contract.

The court then heard that the company, which has a registered address in Kenmare, Co. Kerry, but whose main office is in Cork City, had turned down his claims. The company said that he was legally fired after a number of problems came up.

Lawyers for the defendant also told Mr. Higgins that he would be treated harshly if he did anything to hurt the firm’s business brand, reputation, or profile.

Mr. Higgins said he didn’t know what the defendant meant and that he hadn’t done anything wrong.

The trial period

His lawyer told the court at the time that before Mr. Higgins could start working for the company in May 2021, he had to go through a three-month trial period, which ended last August.

His boss didn’t do a review, and his lawyer said that Mr. Higgins kept doing his job without complaint or criticism.

But problems with the company director are said to have come up between September and December of last year.

Mr. Higgins said in a signed statement that he was sick for a while because of a series of events. He said that the company told him at the end of last month that he would not be kept on after an extended trial period.

He said that no investigation was ever done and that he could not fight the decision.

He had said that after the three-month trial period was over, his job at the company would be permanent. He had said that bringing up the defendant’s longer probationary period was a way to get around the clear terms of his employment contract.

AIT Architecture (Meitheal Design Partners) Lack All Morals And Ethics!

2 Total Score
Ripoff Artists!

AIT Architecture & Patrick O’Toole are narcissistic scam artists who lack any morals. I would strongly advice against doing business with these cons.

3Expert Score
Honesty & Transparency
Customer Experience
1User's score
Honesty & Transparency
Customer Experience
  • Old Company
  • Abuse Employees & Freelancers
  • Nitpickers
  • Patrick has a massive ego
Add your review  |  Read reviews and comments

1 Comment
  1. 0.5
    Honesty & Transparency
    Customer Experience

    Good place to leave at the end of a working day, it can only get better after a day with Patrick, whose ego is, along with the Great Wall of China, apparently visible from space.

    + PROS: Good place to leave at the end of a working day, it can only get better after a day with Patrick
    - CONS: Dealing with an ego so fragile
    Helpful(0) Unhelpful(0)You have already voted this

Leave a reply

Your total score