THE EQUALITY TRIBUNAL
EMPLOYMENT EQUALITY ACTS 1998-2008
Decision DEC – E2009 – 076
PARTIES
Mr. Dariusz Walczak
and
Ard Services Ltd.
(represented by IBEC)
File Reference: EE/2006/425
Date of Issue: 4th of September, 2009
Claim
The case concerns a claim by Mr Dariusz Walczak that Ard Services Ltd discriminated against him on the ground of race contrary to Section 6(2)(h) of the Employment Equality Acts 1998 to 2008, in terms of his terms and conditions of employment. The complainant further claims that the respondent victimisatorily dismissed him when he tried to stand over his rights, contrary to S. 74(2) of the Acts.
The complainant referred a complaint under the Employment Equality Acts 1998 to 2008 to the Director of the Equality Tribunal on 1 November 2006. On 7 November 2008, in accordance with her powers under S. 75 of the Acts, the Director delegated the case to Ms Valerie Murtagh, an Equality Officer, for investigation, hearing and decision and for the exercise of other relevant functions of the Director under Part VII of the Acts. On 5 March 2009, in accordance with her powers under S. 75 of the Acts, the Director delegated the case to me, Stephen Bonnlander, an Equality Officer, for investigation, hearing and decision and for the exercise of other relevant functions of the Director under Part VII of the Acts. On this date my investigation commenced. As required by Section 79(1) of the Acts and as part of my investigation, I proceeded to hold a joint hearing of the case on 2 September 2009. I wrote to the parties on 9 March 2009 to advise them of the hearing date. Since the complainant had been previously uncontactable by email or telephone, I issued a reminder letter by registered post to him on 26 August 2009, which I copied to the respondent. On 1 September 2009, at 10:45pm, the complainant sent an email to the Tribunal inbox and me to advise that he had returned to Poland some time ago due to family circumstances, and that he was unable to afford to travel to the hearing due to unemployment. He requested that I advise him of legal rules and regulations that apply in such a case, and advised the Tribunal of his new address. The complainant did not attend the hearing of the complaint.
I am not unsympathetic to the situation the complainant finds himself in. However, as part of my investigation under Section 79 of the Act, I am obliged to hold a hearing. The rules of natural justice are clear, in that it is for the complainant to establish a prima facie case of whatever matter he complains of in that hearing, and this necessitates the appearance of the complainant at the hearing. The Tribunal does not facilitate any party before it with regard to their costs, which remain the responsibility of each party. Furthermore, I am satisfied that the complainant was advised of the hearing date in good time.
Decision
Based on the foregoing I find pursuant to S 79(6) of the Acts that due to the complainant's failure to attend such a hearing any obligation under Section 79(1) has ceased. As no evidence was given at the hearing in support of the allegation of discrimination I conclude the investigation and find against the complainant.
______________________
Stephen Bonnlander
Equality Officer
4 September 2009