A senior Irish-based employee of social media platform X, who allegedly liked tweets critical of the company and its owner Elon Musk, has settled the High Court he brought against his employer after a disciplinary process was brought against him.
The High Court was told that the entire action brought by Aaron Rodericks, who is the co-lead of Threat Disruption at X had been resolved, and that the matter could be struck out.
Part of Mr Rodericks' role with the company is to help prevent disruption and misinformation being posted on X about elections.
In his action Mr Rodericks claimed that he had been subjected to a process that was "a complete sham" over allegations that he "demonstrated hostility" to the company for allegedly liking tweets by third parties that are critical of X, Mr Musk and the firm's CEO, Linda Yaccarino.
Mr Rodericks, with an address at Cualanor Dún Laoghaire, in Dublin, denied any wrongdoing in respect of his employment.
A disciplinary hearing against Mr Rodericks was due to be heard by the company last September.
However, shortly before that meeting was due to begin, the High Court granted Mr Rodericks a temporary injunction, which had been granted on an ex-parte basis, halting that process.
His proceedings were against Twitter International Unlimited Company.
It had denied any wrongdoing and had argued that the injunction should be lifted.
The High Court was due to hear an application to have the injunction kept in place pending the outcome of the full hearing of the dispute.
However when the application to continue the injunction was called on, Colm Kitson BL, instructed by Daniel Spring and Company Solicitors for Mr Rodericks, told Mr Justice Mark Sanfey that the matter had been resolved and the entire proceedings could be struck out.
Brendan Kirwan SC for the defendant said his side was consenting to that order.
No details of the settlement, which is understood to be confidential, was revealed to the court.
The judge welcomed the settlement, and praised both sides legal teams for bringing about a resolution of the proceedings.
In his action Mr Rodericks had claimed that the disciplinary process against him arose after he had posted about job vacancies at the company on his personal X account.
In response he said he received "a barrage of threatening, and abusive messages" from persons who wrongly believed the posts were an attempt by X to censor free speech and influence election outcomes.
He claimed he made the company aware of the backlash he received, but says it took no action.
He claimed that he was subsequently made the subject of a disciplinary process that saw him suspended from his job for allegedly liking disparaging posts about X, Mr Musk, and Ms Yaccarino.
He said that he was very surprised over the allegations, as the company had adopted a strong position on the freedom of speech on the platform, and was not aware of any requirement the precludes employees from liking material posted on X.
