EMPLOYMENT EQUALITY ACTS 1998-2011
Decision DEC - E2013 - 021
PARTIES
Bachrate, Partl and Cicmis (represented by Richard Grogan and Associates, Solicitors)
and
David Grant and Mary Grant t/a Carnegie Court Hotel (represented by Ken Stafford Management Consultancy Services)
File References: EE/2011/492-493 & EE/2011/536
Date of Issue: 19th March 2013
1. Claim
1.1. The case concerns a claim by Ms Petra Bachrate, Mr Peter Partl, and Mr Tomas Cicmis that David Grant and Mary Grant, t/a Carnegie Court Hotel discriminated against them on the ground of race contrary to Section 6(2)(h) of the Employment Equality Acts 1998 to 2011, in terms of conditions of employment.
1.2. The complainants referred a complaint each under the Employment Equality Acts 1998 to 2008 to the Director of the Equality Tribunal on 13 June 2011, resp Mr Cicmis submitted his complaint on 7 July 2011. A submission was received from the complainants on 7 February 2012. A submission was received from the respondent on 31 January 2012. On 21 February 2013, in accordance with his powers under S. 75 of the Acts, the Director delegated the cases 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 cases on 15 March 2013. Three other named complainants who were associated with the case withdrew their complaints prior to the hearing. Ms Bachrate, Mr Partl, and Mr Cicmis did not attend the hearing without notifying their representative or the Tribunal as to the reasons for their absence. The respondent was in attendance. Under the circumstances, the complainants' representative accepted that their cases would fail for want of prosecution.
2. Decision
2.1. In the light of the foregoing, and in accordance with Section 79(6) of the Employment Equality Acts 1998 to 2011, 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 Ms Bachrate's, Mr Partl's, and Mr Cicmis'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 complainants.
______________________
Stephen Bonnlander
Equality Officer
19 March 2013