THE EQUALITY TRIBUNAL
EMPLOYMENT EQUALITY ACTS 1998-2008
Decision DEC - E2011-113
PARTIES
Alexander Moskovka & Sergejs Klimovs
(Represented by Richard Grogan & Associates, Solicitors)
-V-
Avena Developments Limited (In Receivership)
File Reference: EE/2008/253 & 254
Date of Issue: 15th June 2011
Decision DEC - E2011-113
Alexander Moskovka & Sergejs Klimovs
(Represented by Richard Grogan & Associates, Solicitors)
-V-
Avena Developments Limited (In Receivership)
Keywords
Employment Equality Acts 1998-2008, Dismissal - Section 2(1), Section 6(1) - less favourable treatment, Section 6(2)(h) - Race, Section 8 conditions of employment and discriminatory dismissal, failure to attend hearing, obligation under Section 79 ceased.
1. Dispute
1.1 This dispute concerns a claim by the above named complainants that they were discriminated against by the above named respondent on the race ground, in terms of Sections 6(1), 6(2) (h) of the Employment Equality Acts 1998-2008 and contrary to section 8 in relation to their conditions of employment and dismissal.
2. Background
2.1 The complainants referred a complaint under the Employment Equality Acts to the Equality Tribunal on the 21st April 2008 alleging that the respondent discriminated against them contrary to the Acts. In accordance with his powers under section 75 of the Employment Equality Acts, 1998-2008 the Director delegated the cases on 12th April, 2011 and the 16th May 2011 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 VII of those Acts. This is the date I commenced my investigation. A written submission was received from the complainants on the 1st December 2008 and from the respondent on the 12th January 2009. As required by section 79(1) of the Acts and as part of my investigation, I proceeded to hearing on the 19th May 2011 in Sligo.
3. Summary of the Cases
3.1 Letters dated the 5th April 2011 were sent by registered post to the complainants' solicitor on record, P.C Moore & Co Solicitors, and to the respondent notifying them that a joint hearing was taking place as required by Section 79(1) of the Act on the 19th May 2011. On the 16th May 2011 the complainants' solicitor, Richard Grogan & Associates, requested an adjournment of the hearing to allow time to notify complainants of the hearing because he had not received the notification of the hearing until the 13th of May. The application for the adjournment of the hearing was refused on the 16th May 2011 because the Tribunal had not been notified of the change of solicitor. I sat on the 19th of May 2011 to hear the complaints and there was no attendance by the complainants. Shortly before the commencement of the hearing the Tribunal secretariat received a telephone call from Richard Grogan & Associates saying that they would not be attending the hearing because it had not come to their attention in time that the adjournment requested was not granted
4 Conclusions of the Equality Officer
4.1 I am satisfied from the correspondence that the complainants were properly notified that a hearing in his case was taking place on the 19th May 2011. As the adjournment requested was not granted, I find that the failure of the complainants to attend the hearing was unreasonable in the circumstances.
4.2 Decision
In the light of the foregoing, and in accordance with Section 79(6) of the Act, 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 complainants' 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 have concluded the investigation and find against the complainants.
_________________
Marian Duffy
Equality Officer
15th June 2011