THE EQUALITY TRIBUNAL
EMPLOYMENT EQUALITY ACTS 1998-2008
Decision DEC - E2010 - 100
PARTIES
Mr. Artur Pisula
(represented by Richard Grogan & Associates, Solicitors)
and
A Construction Company
(represented by Ms. Helen Barry, IBEC)
File Reference: EE/2007/359
Date of Issue: 18th June 2010
1. Claim
1.1 The case concerns a claim by Mr Artur Pisula that he was discriminated against by the respondent on the grounds of race contrary to Section 6(2)(h) of the Employment Equality Acts 1998 to 2008, in terms of discriminatory treatment, discriminatory dismissing without proper procedures, harassment and a claim in relation to a collective agreement.
1.2 The complainant referred a complaint under the Employment Equality Acts 1998 to 2008 to the Director of the Equality Tribunal on 16th July 2007. On 21st July 2009, in accordance with her powers under S. 75 of the Acts, the Director delegated the case to me, James Kelly, 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 a hearing on 16th June 2010. The parties were notified of this date by registered post. On the day of the hearing, the respondent was in attendance. The representative of the complainant was in attendance, but the complainant was not. The complainant's representative stated that the complainant had failed to attend. I waited at the venue until 11:20am, some 50 minutes after the scheduled start time of the hearing. However, the complainant did not present himself within that time. Before leaving the hearing venue I contacted the Tribunal's administrative staff to see if Mr. Pisula had made contact with the Equality Tribunal directly. I was informed that he had not.
2. Decision
2.1 In light of the foregoing, and in accordance with Section 79(6) of the Employment Equality Acts 1998 to 2008, I issue the following decision. As part of my investigation under Section 79 of the Act, I am obliged to hold a hearing. I find that the complainant's failure to attend such a hearing was unreasonable in the circumstances and that any obligation under Section 79 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.
___________________
James Kelly
Equality Officer
18th June 2010