Equal Status Acts 2000 to 2008
EQUALITY OFFICER’S DECISIONS NO: DEC-S2008-047
REID
V
DRAKE
File No. ES/2005/0727
Date of Issue: 5 August 2008
Keywords
Equal Status Acts 2000 to 2004 – Discrimination, section 3 - Harassment (other than sexual harassment), section 11(2)– sexual orientation ground, section 3(2)(d) – Victimisation, section 3(2)(j) – Less favourable treatment, section 5(1) – failure to attend a hearing
1. Delegation under the Equal Status Acts 2000 to 2004
1.1. .Mr. Darren Reid referred a claim to the Director of the Equality Tribunal under the Equal Status Acts 2000 to 2004 on 27 October 2005. In accordance with her powers under section 75 of the Employment Equality Act, 1998 and 2004, the Director then delegated the case to me, Tara Coogan, 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 Acts. The investigation under section 25 commenced on 11 April 2008. A hearing was scheduled for 30 July 2008.
2. Dispute
2.1. The dispute concerns a complaint by Mr. Reid that he was treated contrary to section 5(1), subjected to harassment contrary to section 11(2) and was further victimised by the respondent, Mr. Jonathan Drake. Mr. Drake is the owner of the restaurant where the alleged incident took place and, at the time of the incident, was also the complainant’s landlord. The respondent was notified on 20 September 2005.
3. Hearing
3.1. A hearing was scheduled to take place in the Equality Tribunal on 30 July 2008. Neither party attended. The complainant rang the Tribunal on 29 July 2008 to notify me that he ‘was not in the mood for a hearing’. Upon receiving this message, I requested that a member of the administrative section contact Mr. Reid for clarification and to refer him to my letter informing him of the investigation and hearing date. This letter also explains the procedure for any request for an adjournment. No adjournment request was received.
4. Decision
4.1. Section 38A (1) of the Equal Status Acts 2000 to 2004 sets out the burden of proof which applies to claims of discrimination. It requires the complainant to establish, in the first instance, facts upon which he can rely in asserting that he suffered discriminatory treatment. It is only where such a prima facie case has been established that the onus shifts to the respondent to rebut the inference of discrimination raised.
4.2. As the complainant failed to attend the hearing, and I am satisfied that he was formally notified, I find that the complainant has failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination. Therefore, under section 25(4) of the Acts, I conclude this investigation and find in favour of the respondent.
______________
Tara Coogan
Equality Officer
5 August 2008