ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00012856
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | A Citizen | A Government Department |
Representatives |
| Conor Quinn BL Karen MacNamara Chief State Solicitor's Office |
Complaint:
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 21 Equal Status Act, 2000 | CA-00017099-001 | 23/01/2018 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 11/09/2018
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Penelope McGrath BL
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 21 of the Equal Status Act 2000 (as amended) an individual may seek redress in respect of any prohibited conduct that has been directed against him or her by referring a case to the Workplace Relations Commission. It is a condition precedent to bringing any such matter before the Workplace Relations Commission that the individual complainant shall have already notified the Respondent in writing of the nature of the allegation and the intention to seek such redress if not satisfied with the Respondent’s response. This Notice in writing shall be brought within two months of the said prohibited conduct or the last instance of same.
Section 5 of the Equal Status Act 2000 (as amended) prohibits discrimination by any person or any organisation in disposing of goods to the public or in the provision of a service to the public such that that person is treated less favourably than another person would be treated in a comparable situation and has been so treated. The discrimination must fall within one of the grounds specified in Section 5 of the said Act.
Pursuant to Section 25 of the Equal Status Act 2000 I have had the within matter referred to me by the Director General of the Workplace Relations Commission for the purpose of investigation into claims of discrimination and I have heard where appropriate interested parties and have considered any relevant documentation. I am satisfied that the Complainant herein has complied with the obligation to provide a notification (Form ES1) within the time limit.
Background:
This is a claim of discrimination brought by the Mother and Legal Guardian of a minor who has been diagnosed with Autism. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Claimant says her son has been discriminated against on the grounds of his disability. In particular, the Claimant states that her son’s disability should allow him to receive appropriate free travel which same entitlement applies to children who are medically blind. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent states that an overwhelming majority of children with disability are not entitled to free travel and that the Complainant is not comparing like with like. |
Findings and Conclusions:
I am satisfied that both parties were put on notice of the hearing date including time and place. The Respondent was represented at the hearing. After one hour of waiting I invited the Respondent to make an application. The Respondent applied to have this matter Struck Out. I acquiesced to this application with a stay of 48 hours to allow the Claimant make representation. The Claimant has not been in contact. |
Decision:
Section 25 of the Equal Status Acts, 2000 – 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under section 27 of that Act.
This matter is Struck Out for no appearance on the part of the Claimant and no person to move the claim on her behalf. |
Dated: October 3rd 2018
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Penelope McGrath BL
Key Words:
|