Equal Status Acts 2000 to 2011
DECISION NO: DEC-S2016-059
Anna Kocot
V
FBD Insurance
(Represented by Matheson Solicitors)
File Nos.et-158989-es-15
Date of Issue: 3rd October 2016
Keywords
Equal Status Acts 2000 to 2011 – Indirect Discrimination, ground of race ,
1 Delegation under the Equal Status Acts 2000 to 2004
Ms Anna Kocot (the complainant) referred claims to the Director of the Equality Tribunal under the Equal Status Acts (hereinafter referred to as “the Acts”) on the 19 August 2016. On 24th May 2016, in accordance with his powers under section 75 of the Equal Status Acts, the Director General of the Workplace Relations Commission delegated the case to me, Peter Healy, an Equality Officer, for investigation, hearing and decision and for the exercise of other relevant functions of the Director General under section 25 of the Acts, on which date my investigation commenced.
This decision is issued by me following the establishment of the Workplace Relations Commission on 1 October 2015, as an Adjudication Officer who was an Equality Officer prior to 1 October 2015, in accordance with section 83.3 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015.
2 Dispute
2.1 The dispute concerns claims by the complainant that she was discriminated against by the respondent on ground of race in terms of Sections 3(2) (h), contrary to Section 5 of the Equal Status Act, 2000-2012 relating to a quote for car insurance.
2. FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS OF THE EQUALITY OFFICER
2.1 Submissions were received from both parties and a hearing of the complainant was scheduled for the 29th September 2016 at the WRC, Davitt House, Dublin 2 and both parties were notified by registered and ordinary post. The notification to both parties requested that they advise, by return, the names of attendees and if any special facilities were required for their participation at the hearing.
I sat to hear the case as notified. The respondent and their representative were in attendance. The complainant did not attend.
3. Conclusions of the Equality Officer
3.1 I am satisfied that the complainant was on notice that a hearing in his case was scheduled for the 29th September 2016. I am satisfied that this Tribunal has done all that is reasonable to provide for the complainants attendance at a hearing of her complaint.
4. Decision
In the light of the foregoing, and in accordance with the Acts, I issue the following decision:
As part of my investigation under Section 25 of the Acts, 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 25 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.
______________
Peter Healy
Adjudication Officer
3rd October 2016