Mr. Martin O'Donnell, Mr. Michael O'Reilly & Mr. Philip O'Neill (represented by Gerard O'Keeffe & Co., Solicitors) -V- Sullivans Royal Hotel, Gort (represented by Mr. Colman Sherry Solicitor)
Delegation under Equal Status Act, 2000
The complainants referred a claim to the Director of Equality Investigations on 9th of October, 2001 under the Equal Status Act, 2000. In accordance with her powers under section 75 of the Employment Equality Act, 1998 and under the Equal Status Act, 2000, the Director then delegated the case to me, Marian Duffy, an Equality Officer, for investigation, hearing and decision and for the exercise of other relevant functions of the Director under Part III of the Equal Status Act, 2000. Subsequent to the hearing of this case on 30 July, 2002, the Equality Officer to whom the three complaints (Numbers ES2001/608, ES2001/609 and ES2001/610) had been delegated requested on 25th March 2003 that they be reassigned, in accordance with sections 75 (4) and 75(7)(c) of the Employment Equality Act 1998. The three complaints were duly reassigned to another
Equality Officer by Mr. Gerry Hickey, Head of Equal Status, in accordance with the functions duly delegated to him by the Director, on 25th March 2003.
By order of the High Court dated 10th November 2003 and made in proceedings record no 2003 No 454 JR, Mr Justice Abbott granted an Order of Certiorari in respect of the decision to re-assign dated 25th March 2003. In accordance with the High Court's order, the request for reassignment and the reassignment of each complaint were duly quashed by the High Court on the 21st January 2004. In accordance therefore with the High Court's order, I am now issuing my decision in these proceedings arising from the hearing on the 30th July, 2002.
1. Dispute
1.1 The dispute concerns a claim by the above named that they were discriminated against by Sullivan's Royal Hotel on the Traveller community ground in terms of Sections 3(1)(a), and 3(2) (i) of the Equal Status Act, 2000 and contrary to Section 5(1) of that Act in that they alleged that they were refused a service in the respondent's premises which is generally available to the public. The respondent denied discriminatory treatment on the Traveller community ground and submitted that the complainants were not refused service and had in fact been served a meal in the hotel prior to ordering drinks. The respondent
submitted that there was a short delay in filling the drinks order due to an empty beer barrel. When the drinks order was filled the complainants refused to accept same and accused the staff of discriminatory treatment.
2. Conclusions of the Equality Officer
2.1 The complainants and their legal representative failed to attend the hearing scheduled for the 30th July, 2002. The respondent, his witnesses and solicitor attended. Having heard the evidence of the respondent and in the absence of any evidence by the complainants, I find that the complainants failed to establish a prima facie case of discriminatory treatment.
3. Decision
3.1 I find therefore, that Sullivans Royal Hotel did not unlawfully discriminate against Mr. Martin O'Donnell, Mr. Michael O'Reilly and Mr. Phillip O'Neill on the Traveller community ground on 29th July, 2001 in terms of Sections 3(1)(a), and 3(2)(i) and contrary to Section 5(1) of the Equal Status Act, 2000.
______________
Marian Duffy
Equality Officer
17 February, 2004