EQUAL STATUS ACTS
DECISION NO. DEC-S2017-039
PARTIES
Cork Deaf Club
-v-
Office of Public Works
FILE NO: ES/2014/0171
Date of issue: 10th of November, 2017
1. Dispute
This dispute involves a claim on behalf of the complainant
that it was discriminated against by the respondent, on grounds of disability when the respondent failed to provide them with reasonable accommodation in relation to a planned tour of Kilmainham Gaol.
Background
2.1 The complainant referred a complaint under the Equal Status Acts, 2000-2015 to the Equality Tribunal on the 11th of August, 2014. It is submitted that the complainant had contacted the respondent in order to make a group booking for a tour of the Gaol and had requested a Sign Language Interpreter or Deaf Facilitator for the tour. This was refused by the respondent on the basis that it was unable to do so, but as an alternative the respondent offered to provide complimentary admission to the Complainant if they brought their own interpreter. The Complainant declined, the tour was never booked, and the present complaint was initiated. The complainant submits the respondent failed to provide the complainant with reasonable accommodation for a disability.
2.2 In accordance with his powers under section 75 of the Employment Equality Acts, 1998-2015 and under the Equal Status Acts, 2000-2015, the Director delegated the case on the 25th of April, 2017 to me Orla Jones, Equality Officer, for for investigation, hearing and decision and for the exercise of other relevant functions of the Director under III of the Equal Status Acts, 2000-2015. This is the date I commenced my investigation. Written submissions were received from both parties. As required by Section 25(1) and as part of my investigation, I proceeded to a Hearing on the 28th of July, 2017. Final information in respect of this matter was received on the 11th of October, 2017.
2.3 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 84 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015.
3. Preliminary Jurisdictional Issue –Locus Standi under the Acts
3.1 The complainant in this case is a club. In advance of the hearing of this claim, the Equality Officer raised an issue with the respective parties regarding whether or not the complainant, Cork Deaf Club, as a body, rather than an individual person, has the locus standi to refer a complaint under the provisions of the Equal Status Acts, 2000 to 2015. Both parties were afforded an opportunity to forward their respective observations on this issue before, during and after the hearing.
3.2 In the circumstances, I must therefore decide, as a preliminary issue, whether or not the complainant, Cork Deaf Club as a body, rather than an individual person, has the locus standi to refer a complaint under the provisions of the Equal Status Acts, 2000 to 2015.
4. Conclusions of the Equality Officer regarding the issue of jurisdiction
4.1 In making my decision in this matter, I have taken cognisance of the oral and written submissions made by the parties. The general prohibition of discrimination on specified grounds in relation to inter alia the provision of services is set out in the Equal Status Acts, 2000 to 2015 in the following terms:
Section 3(1) of the Equal Status Acts provides that discrimination occurs “where a person is treated less favourably than another person is, has been or would be treated in a comparable situation on any of the grounds specified in subsection (2)…"
Section 3(2)(g) provides that: as between any two persons, the discriminatory ground of disability is,
(g) that one is a person with a disability and the other either is not or is a person with a different disability (the “disability ground”),
4.2 As can be seen from the legislation, discrimination shall be taken to occur where one person is treated less favourably than another on any of the stated discriminatory grounds. The stated discriminatory grounds refer to the position as between any two persons who for example, have different disabilities. In examining this issue I am also guided by the decision of the Equality Tribunal in the Gloria case ref Dec-S2008-078 Gloria (Irelands Lesbian and Gay Choir) Vs Cork International Choral Festival. The Equality Officer in that case considered in detail whether the Complainant in that case had the locus standi to bring a complaint under the Equal Status Acts. The Equality Officer concluded that a non-natural person, whether incorporated or not could not be regarded as having a protected characteristic and therefore could not be discriminated against within the meaning of the Equal Status Acts. The Equality Officer also found that under the Equal Status Acts “person” is defined as including an incorporated or unincorporated body of persons, only by reference to who may be a respondent to a complaint, not who may bring a complaint and that the Act is drafted in such a way as to exclude potential Complainant’s from the wider definition of “person” under the Act which only applies to potential respondents.
4.3 The legal opinion provided by the complainant in the present case advances various arguments as to why and in what circumstances an unincorporated body such as Cork Deaf Club may initiate legal proceedings however I am of the opinion that the issue of locus standi in the context of taking the present claim under the Equal Status Act must centre around the question of how a club can possess the characteristic of having a disability.
4.4 The complainant’s submission raises arguments in respect of the circumstances under which an unincorporated body may initiate legal proceedings and considers how a Complainant is defined for the purpose of the Equal Status Acts. The complainant’s submission also considers the question of whether, the Complainant as an unincorporated body has the legal capacity to initiate proceedings pursuant to the Equal Status Acts, and whether it has a sufficient interest in the complaint to demonstrate locus standi.
4.5 The complainant has also submitted that as a matter of Irish and EU law, the Equal Status Acts do permit an unincorporated body to bring a complaint in certain circumstances and submits that there is authority from the UK (county court) to indicate that a non-natural person can bring a complaint under the equivalent of the Equal Status Acts in that jurisdiction, and submit that the distinction to be drawn is not whether the complaint can be brought but rather what remedy can be provided.
4.6 Having considered the arguments raised by the complainant in its submissions which are lengthy and extensive I am not satisfied that Cork Deaf Club has the locus standi to take the present claim under the Equal Status Acts as it is not possible for a club to possess the characteristic of having a particular disability and therefore the Club cannot pursue a complaint on the disability ground.
4.7 In the circumstances, I find that the complainant in the present case i.e. Cork Deaf Club does not have the locus standi to make a complaint under the Equal Status Acts, 2000 to 2015. Accordingly, I find that I do not have jurisdiction in relation to the substantive complaint of discrimination on the disability ground contrary to the terms of the Equal Status Acts, 2000 to 2015.
5. Decision
5.1 On the basis of the foregoing, I find that the complainant in the instant case does not have the locus standi to make a complaint under the Equal Status Acts, 2000 to 2015 and accordingly, I find that I do not have jurisdiction in relation to the substantive complaint of discrimination on the disability ground contrary to the terms of the Equal Status Acts, 2000 to 2015.
___________________
Orla Jones
Adjudication Officer/Equality Officer
10th of November, 2017