Equality Officer Decision
DEC-S2007-023
Mr. William O'Donoghue
(represented by Ms. Heather Rosen)
v
Clare County Council
(represented by Michael Houlihan & Partners, Solicitors)
Key words
Equal Status Acts, 2000 -2004 - Discrimination, section 3(1) - Traveller
community, Section 3(2)(i) - providing accommodation and housing services, Section 6(1)(c) - harassment, section 11 - complainants non-attendance at callover, adjournment requests - failure to establish a prima facie case.
Delegation under Equal Status Acts, 2000-2004
The complainant referred a number of claims to the Director of the Equality Tribunal under the Equal Status Acts, 2000 -2004. In accordance with her powers under section 75 of the Employment Equality Act, 1998 and under the Equal Status Acts, the Director delegated the cases 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, 2000-2004. The hearing took place in Ennis on 15th January 2006.
1. Dispute
1.1 The dispute concerns claims by the above named complainant that he was discriminated against by named officials of Clare County Council and the Council itself on the Traveller Community ground. The complainant alleges that the respondent discriminated against him in terms of Sections 3(1)(a), and 3(2)(i) of the Equal Status Act, 2000 contrary to Section 6(1)(c) of that Act. He also alleges that he was harassed contrary to section 11 of the Act.
2.0 Preliminary Issue
This case is one of a number of complaints referred to the Equality Tribunal during the period 2004-2006, on behalf of a large number of complainants, against the same respondent alleging discrimination in relation to housing and related matters. It was decided to sort the cases by family groups so that each complainant family would have a separate hearing before the Equality Officer. A number of other issues concerning all the cases arose and these were dealt with at a procedural hearing on 26th May 2006. (For the background information see Jim Mongans & others v Clare County Council, DEC-S2007-012)
3. Summary of Events
3.1 The complainant's representative was notified orally by me on 20th October 2006, that I was arranging a callover on 4th December 2006, of all the cases referred against the respondents including the cases of the complainant herein. A written confirmation of the date issued to the representative on 3rd November 2006. The representative applied for an adjournment of the matters on the grounds that she was out of the country on holidays and would be unable to notify the complainants of the callover. The adjournment was granted and the parties were notified that the callover would take place on 15th January 2007.
3.2 A written notification issued to the representatives confirming the date and requesting that the complainant attend the callover on 15th January 2007. A notification of the hearing was also sent to the complainant's address. The complainant and his representative was notified that if the complainant did not attend the Equality Officer may decide, in the absence of a valid explanation for non-attendance, that he had not established a prima facie case of discrimination. The complainant's representative made two further applications to the Tribunal, on the 7th and 11th January 2007, for an adjournment of the cases listed including this case. These requests were refused on the basis that no exceptional circumstances existed which would warrant the granting of an adjournment.
3.3 It should be noted that during the course of other hearings of cases against Clare County Council listed for the week of 16th to 20th October 2006, the complainant's representative submitted a letter on behalf of all of the complainant family groups, including the complainant in this case, requesting that I withdraw from hearing the cases. I informed her that I would not be acceding to the request. At the commencement of the callover on 15th January 2007 the complainants' representative made a further application for an adjournment stating that she wished to judicially review my decisions in previous cases. (For the background information see cases Michael Mongans & others v Clare County Council DEC-S2006-084, Patrick Mongans & others v Clare County Council, DEC-S2006-085) I refused the application referring the representative to letters dated 10th and 12th January 2007 and to my earlier decisions cited above setting out the reasons why adjournments would not be granted.
3.4 The complainant did not attend the callover on the 15th January nor did he attend on any other day during the week of 15th to 19th January 2007 to explain his absence.
4. Conclusions of the Equality Officer
4.1 In the application to the Tribunal for an adjournment the representative stated that the complainant had some personal difficulties and the requested that the hearing take place at another venue convenient to him and other members of his family who also had complaints before the Tribunal.
4.2 It should be noted that this case was already adjourned from the week commencing 4th December 2006 to give the complainants' representative an opportunity to inform all the complainants about the dates of the callover. No mention was made in that application of any of the difficulties which formed the basis of the later applications for adjournments. Following the adjournment granted in November 2006, I requested the complainants' representative to provide the addresses and telephone contact details of all of the complainants involved in these cases. I then sent a notification of the hearing to the complainant's address provided by the representative.
4.3 I am satisfied that the complainant's representative had notification of the callover arranged for the week commencing 15th January 2007. I am also satisfied that the complainant and his representative were on notice that all matters referred to in the complaint forms lodged with the Equality Tribunal involving the named respondents would have been dealt with at this hearing if he had attended. The complainant's representative undertook the responsibility to notify the complainant of the callover and I am satisfied that he was notified as he had instructed her to apply for an adjournment. As stated above the adjournment applications were refused but the complainant did not attend the callover as arranged nor did he give any reason for his non-attendance. As there was no appearance by the complainant and as he has failed to provide a satisfactory reason for his non-attendance, I find that he has failed to establish a prima facie case of discriminatory treatment and accordingly, I dismiss his complaints.
5. Decision
5.1 On the basis of the foregoing, I find that the complainant has not established a prima facie case of discrimination and accordingly his case cannot succeed. I therefore dismiss the cases referred by William O'Donoghue (ES/2004/282, ES/2004/501, ES/2005/ 886, ES2006/0177 (formerly ES2006/006), ES/2006/065, ES/2006/178 (formerly ES/2006/118), ES/2006/173 (formerly ES/2006/037), ES/2006/0174 (formerly ES/2006/085), to the Equality Tribunal against Clare County Council.
_________________
Marian Duffy
Equality Officer
8th March 2007