Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Lukasz  Woloszyn

Mary Casey

Representatives

  N/A

 N/A

Act

Complaint/Dispute Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 21 Equal Status Act, 2000

CA-00032353-001

08/11/2019

The complainant moved into the respondent’s property in 2014. He became entitled to HAP in 2017 but claimed that the respondent would not accept it when requested to do so. He asked again in January 2020 and the respondent once again refused.

The complainant claimed that he moved into the respondent’s property in 2014 along with his partner who had lived there since 2009. He stated that he was an excellent tenant and maintained the property very well.

The complainant became entitled to HAP in 2017 but claimed that the respondent would not accept it when asked to do so. He asked the respondent again in January 2020 and was once again refused. As a result of this refusal, he completed an ES1 form in November 2020 because he believed that he was entitled to HAP.

The respondent agreed that the complainant moved into the property in 2014. She stated that she refused to accept HAP because she was intending to sell the house and was informed by the local authority that she was not required to do so.

The Law

Section 21 (2)(a) of the Equal Status Acts, 2000 - 2015, states that

"Before seeking redress under this section, the complainant-

(a) shall, within 2 months after the prohibited conduct is alleged to have occurred, or, where more than one incident of prohibited conduct is alleged to have occurred, within 2 months after the last such occurrence, notify the respondent in writing of-

(i) the nature of the allegation,

(ii) the complainant's intention, if not satisfied with the respondent's response to the allegation, to seek redress under this Act.”

Section 21 (3)(a) further states that:

On application by a complainant, the Director of the Workplace Relations Commission may—

(ii) exceptionally, where satisfied that it is fair and reasonable in the particular circumstance of the case to do so direct that subsection (2) shall not apply in relation to the complainant to the extent specified in the direction,

and, where such a direction is given, this Part shall have effect accordingly.

The Facts

The Complainant requested that the respondent agree to accept HAP in January 2019 but claimed that she refused to do so.

Formal notification to the Respondent of the alleged discriminatory act was not made until November 2020 by way of the form ES1. This puts the notifications outside of the two-month statutory time limit required under Section 21(2)(a) of the Acts.

While I note the Complainant’s assertion that he is not an Irish national and was therefore unaware of the requisite the time limits, it is well settled that “Ignorance of one’s legal rights, as opposed to the underlying facts giving rise to a complaint, cannot provide a justifiable excuse for failure to bring a claim in time.” (Avery Weigh-Tronix v Kinsley DWT1244).

Accordingly, I cannot accept that the reasons put forward by the Complainant are exceptional and find that he has failed to explain the delay in issuing his notification to the Respondent arising from the instance of alleged discrimination, namely the refusal to accept HAP in January 2019.

For the reasons set out above, I do not have jurisdiction to hear this complaint

ES 1 form; time limit;