Bernard Ward
(Represented by Tallaght Traveller's CDP )
V
Bellway Ltd., t/a The Laurel's Public House, Dublin
(Represented by Arthur Cox, Solicitors)
Headnotes
Equal Status Act, 2000 - Direct discrimination, Section 3(1) (a) - Traveller Ground, Section 3(2) (i) - Disposal of goods and supply of services, Section 5(1) - Prima facie case.
1. Dispute
1.1 This dispute concerns a claim by Bernard Ward that on 15 October 2002, he was treated in a discriminatory manner by the respondent. The complainant referred a claim to the Director of Equality Investigations 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, Dolores Kavanagh, an Equality Officer, for investigation, hearing and decision and for the exercise of this and other relevant functions of the Director under Part III of the Equal Status Act. Final correspondence in this matter was received on 2 October 2006.
2. Summary of Complainants' Case
2.1 The complainant states that he was treated in a discriminatory manner on 15 October 2002 when he was initially served in the respondent premises and was subsequently refused service. The complainant feels that non-Travellers would not be refused service in the same circumstances.
3. Summary of Respondent's Case
3.1 The respondent denies that discrimination occurred and states that the complainant and his companions were initially served in the premises on 15 October 2002 and were subsequently refused service because of their unacceptable behaviour in the premises. The respondent states that the group, including the complainant, became loud and argumentative and that a row had broken out between two members of the group in the toilets on the premises. When the group refused to leave the premises the Gardaí had been called to the scene by the then manager of the respondent premises. The Gardaí had then asked the group to leave.
4 Conclusions of the Equality Officer
4.1. Having carefully considered all of the evidence presented in this matter I am satisfied that the complainant has failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination on the Traveller ground.
4.2 The respondent does not dispute that the complainant is a member of the Traveller community. It is common case that the complainant and his companions on the evening in question were initially served in the respondent premises.
4.3 The complainant states that he and his companions did not engage in any argument in the respondent premises on the evening in question. The respondent states that the complainant and his companions were refused further service after they became loud and argumentative.
4.4 The manager of the respondent premises at the time of the incident was not available to provide direct evidence in this matter. However, a report of the incident, compiled by him at the time of the incident, was submitted in evidence by the respondent. Direct evidence was provided by a barman, who was working in the respondent premises at the time of the incident, and by the complainant. The complainant did not call any witnesses in this matter.
4.5 The Garda report submitted in this matter supports the respondent's account of events.
In the circumstances I am satisfied, on the balance of probabilities, that the complainant was not treated less favourably than a non-Traveller would have been treated in the same circumstances.
5 Decision
5.1 I find that the complainant has failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination on the Traveller ground.
__________________________
Dolores Kavanagh
Equality Officer
17 October, 2006