ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION

Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00027446

Parties:

	Complainant	Respondent
Anonymised Parties	Student	Community School

Representatives

Uncle (Solicitor) and Father

School Principal

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-00035110-001	09/03/2020

Date of Adjudication Hearing: 01/10/2020

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Brian Dalton

Procedure:

In accordance with Section 25 of the Equal Status Act, 2000 (The Act) following the referral of the complaint to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint.

Background:

The student’s application to attend the Community College (a post primary school) was unsuccessful and contends that the School engaged in prohibited conduct by favouring Church of Ireland students over other religious faiths or of no faith.

The College admits just over 200 new entrants each year and has in excess of 400 applications for those places. The school is a Designated Community College and is an Educational Training Board (ETB) school. The ETB operates what it refers to as a model agreement between it and a ‘Trustee Partner’. This agreement gives the partner a role in the management of the School and a role in determining the School’s characteristic spirit. The Board of Management comprises of 3 ETB members, 3 Catholic members, 1 Church of Ireland member, 2 Parent members and 2 Teacher members.

The School was established in 1995 and is co-educational. It is argued by the school that its classification as a designated community college is to be contrasted to a community non-denominational school. Designated Community Colleges emerged during the 1970’s and are classed as ‘Designated’ because they are representative of a particular religious denomination, normally Catholic, and make suitable arrangements for other Religions. A Community College can be constituted as either designated or non-designated, meaning the school has a designated Religious ethos while non-designated is non-denominational.

Where there is an excess of applicants for 1st year the college applies a selection process based on the following criteria:

1. Church of Ireland students attending anonymised Church of Ireland National School.

2. Siblings of students, including past pupils, enrolled at anonymised Community College.

3. Applicants living in the catchment area as outlined in Section anonymised and attending one of the listed Primary Schools.

4. Applicants living in the catchment area as outlined in the specified section and not attending one of the listed Primary Schools.

5. Applicants living in the Extended Catchment Area as outlined in the relevant section and attending one of the listed Primary Schools. Applicants in this category will be selected based on their proximity to the College.

6. Applicants living in the Extended Catchment Area as outlined in the relevant section and not attending one of the listed Primary Schools. Applicants in this category will be selected based on their proximity to the College.

7. Applications from outside the catchment area maybe considered for places when applications from all applications in Categories 1-6 have been satisfied.

8. Finally, places will be offered to those students on the late waiting list as per date of receipt of application form.

Summary of Complainant’s Case:

Representatives on behalf of the student contend she was discriminated against on religious grounds. The School prioritised admission of Church of Ireland students attending the School as detailed in the School’s admission policy 2020-21. The student who is Catholic was treated less favourably because of this conduct to favour Church of Ireland applicants over other Religious Faiths or none as detailed in the School policy and is contrary to section 7 of the Act.

In a letter from the School dated 27th September 2019 it states:

“As per our enrolment policy pupils of Church of Ireland faith attending anonymised National School…have priority when it comes to enrolment in First Year.”

The complainant states this is prima facie discriminatory and unlawful under Equal Status legislation. It is alleged that the School is in fact a non-denominational post-primary school and so there are no exemption provisions contained in the Acts.

The complainant has required medical treatment/support and has been diagnosed as suffering from trauma and stress arising from the alleged prohibited conduct.

The internal appeal process was invoked and exhausted without a satisfactory outcome as follows:

· A School letter dated 30th September 2019 was received, advising that the student was not being offered a place for the Academic year 2020/21

· The student was deeply distressed as she lives close to the School and all her close friends were accepted into the School who also attended the same National School.

· Based on her medical condition the student’s doctor requested that the School reconsider their decision. By email dated 3rd October 2019 her parents wrote to the School Principal with regard to less favourable treatment towards their daughter based on religious discrimination and their daughter’s deteriorating mental health arising from the School’s decision not to offer her a place.

· The Principal rang on the 3rd October 2019 and detailed the formal ETB appeal process up to and including an appeal to the Department of Education and Skills.

· These procedures were invoked over the period October 2019 to January 2020 without success.

· It is contended that the breach continues as the School still operates the alleged discriminatory selection criterion favouring Church of Ireland applicants over other applicants as detailed in the School’s admission policy.

· The complaint was lodged with the Workplace Relations Commission on the 9th of March 2020.

Summary of Respondent’s Case:

The respondent states that the complaint is out of time and statute barred. The complainant identified the alleged discriminatory incidents occurred on dates in September and October 2019. The ES 1 form which is formal notification of pending legal action was dated 30th January 2020 which is in excess of the 2 months’ time period to notify the School of pending legal action.

The School rejects the complainant’s classification that the College is a non-denominational school and states it is a designated school and multi-denominational with a unique ethos reflected in how it is governed. This means in practice that it serves generally Catholic populations with suitable arrangements being made for members of other Religions in consultation with appropriate authorities. However, one such designated school in Donegal reflects a diverse religious composition of the local community with representatives from the Catholic Church, Protestant Churches and the Quaker community. A community college maybe constituted as either designated or non-designated and non-designated schools have not functioned as non-denominational schools since their inception.

The College makes provision for Church of Ireland students attending anonymised National School based on the following rationale as set out in the Admissions Policy and Procedure 2020-21:

“There is no non fee paying Church of Ireland School in North West Dublin. Consequently when the college was established, it was designated as a listed post-primary school for Church of Ireland children in order to protect the rights of this minority, thus ensuring that a significant number of this community could be educated together. It was also agreed that a representative of the Church of Ireland community would be a member of the Board of Management. All Applicants in this category will be verified by the Church of Ireland parish in anonymised.”

The complained of selection procedure was comprehensively reviewed in and approved by the Board in January 2018 based on a consultation process held with key stakeholders in the Community. The Admissions Policy and Procedures reflects the findings of that process.

The Board conducted a further review having regard to the Education (Admissions to Schools) Act 2018 and again considered the provision in the enrolment policy for the Church of Ireland community and was advised to continue with the practice. The Board concluded that the provision made for the Church of Ireland allowed them to provide for certain religious values on the basis that is not discrimination for a post-primary school to give preference to students of a particular religious denomination if it is essential to maintain certain religious values and admits persons of a particular religious denomination in preference to others.

The Department of Education and Skills provided all schools with guidance in relation to the Equal Status Act. In that advice it states:

“A second exemption concerns schools where the objective is to provide education in an environment that promotes certain religious values. A school that has this objective can admit a student of a particular religious denomination in preference to other students.” [ Schools and the Equal Status Act, Ed 2, pp13-15].

The School since its foundation as a Designated Community College, has provided for the needs of Church of Ireland students (a minority religion) through its admissions policy. The Church of Ireland ensures that its religious identity is protected through its representation on the Board of Management and also allowing for the Church of Ireland traditions to be marked and celebrated as appropriate during the School calendar year.

Findings and Conclusions:

The respondent contends that the complaint is statute barred. I deal with this matter first as a necessary prerequisite to determining if the complaint is properly before me.

Discrimination is defined in the Equal Status Acts 2000 to 2015 as amended (The Act) at section 3:

3.— For the purposes of this Act discrimination shall be taken to occur —

(a) 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) or, if appropriate, subsection (3B), (in this Act referred to as the ‘discriminatory grounds’) which —

(i) exists,

(ii) existed but no longer exists,

(iii) may exist in the future,

(iv) is imputed to the person concerned, for the purposes of this Act discrimination shall be taken to occur —

At the hearing and in the complaint form submitted to the WRC the complainant states:

“Furthermore, the impugned conduct of the School represents a continuing breach of the Equal Status Acts insofar as the School continues to rely upon such a policy and practice in relation to its proposed admissions in September 2020.”

And in the ES. 1 form dated 30th of January 2020 which is the formal notification to the School of a possible legal claim the complainant asks the School:

“6. In light of the above, can you please advise if anonymised Board of management is prepared to reconsider its position in relation to prioritising access on religious grounds for the academic year 2020/2021?”

The School responded that it would review its selection criterion when detailing its policy for the 2021/2022 admission year.

The admission provision for First Years for 2021/2022 continues to give priority to:

“Church of Ireland students attending anonymised Church of Ireland National School”.

Section 21 (2) of the Act states:

(2) Before seeking redress under this section the complainant—

(a) shall, within 2 months after the prohibited conducted 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,

and

(b) may in that notification, with a view to assisting the complainant in deciding whether to refer the case to the Director of the Workplace Relations Commission or, as the case may be, the Circuit Court, question the respondent in writing so as to obtain material information and the respondent may, if the respondent so wishes, reply to any such questions.

(2A) For the purposes of subsection (2) the date of notification is the date on which the notification is sent, unless it is shown that the notification was not received by the respondent.

(3) (a) On application by a complainant the Director of the Workplace Relations Commission or, as the case may be, the Circuit Court may —

(i) for reasonable cause, direct that in relation to the complainant subsection (2) shall have effect as if for the reference to 2 months there were substituted a reference to such period not exceeding 4 months as is specified in the direction, or

(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.

(b) In deciding whether to give a direction under paragraph (a)(ii) the Director of the Workplace Relations Commission or, as the case may be, the Circuit Court shall have regard to all the relevant circumstances, including —

(i) the extent to which the respondent is, or is likely to be, aware of the circumstances in which the prohibited conduct occurred, and

(ii) the extent of any risk of prejudice to the respondent’s ability to deal adequately with the complaint.

(4) The Director of the Workplace Relations Commission or, as the case may be, the Circuit Court shall not investigate a case unless the Director of the Workplace Relations Commission or the Circuit Court, as the case may be, is satisfied either that the respondent has replied to the notification or that at least one month has elapsed after it was sent to the respondent.

The School responded to Form ES 1 dated 30th January 2019 on the 23rd February.

The School responded to question 6 concerning continuing alleged discrimination as detailed in Form ES1:

“6. In light of the above, can you please advise if CCC Board of management is prepared to reconsider its position to prioritising access on religious grounds for the academic year 2020/2021?

The Board of Management at anonymised College reviews its Admission Policy and Procedures on an annual basis and responds to the legislative changes as they arise. The Board believes that it acted in good faith in its interpretation of the various acts governing schools: Equal Status Act, The Admissions Act and the Education Welfare Act.

As the Board plans its Admissions Policy and Procedures for the 2021-22 academic year it will consider the next set of elements that have commenced in relation to the Education (Admission to Schools) Act, 2018.

The Act specifically defines discrimination as:

(i) exists,

(ii) existed but no longer exists,

(iii) may exist in the future

In the absence of a definitive answer it is reasonable for the complainant to assume that the alleged discrimination continues.

The Act provides at 21 (3):

And that:

(I) the extent to which the respondent is, or is likely to be, aware of the circumstances in which the prohibited conduct occurred, and

(ii) the extent of any risk of prejudice to the respondent’s ability to deal adequately with the complaint.

In considering this matter I have had regard to the statutory criteria in section 21, as amended. The respondent is clearly aware of the circumstances in which the alleged prohibited conduct has occurred allowing for the internal procedures being fully invoked and the matters examined. No prejudice has been suffered by the Respondent.

Furthermore, this is a complaint that concerns continuing alleged ongoing discrimination. Section 21(11) states:

(11) For the purposes of this section prohibited conduct occurs —

(a) if the act constituting it extends over a period, at the end of the period,

(b) if it arises by virtue of a provision which operates over a period, throughout the period.

The respondent has been fully aware of the complainant’s grievance during the months of October 2019 through to January 2020. The complainant detailed her concerns as early as the 3rd October 2019 and formalised her grievance having regard to the appeals process. The complaint itself was lodged well within the 6 months’ time limit.

In accordance with section 21 (3) I direct that section 21 (2) of the Act, shall not apply, as it is fair and reasonable to do so for reasons detailed that this is a complaint concerning continuing alleged ongoing discrimination. The respondent was on notice of the details of the complaint from as early as October 2019 and served with the ES1 on the 30th January 2020 within 4 months of the initial date of the incident giving rise to this complaint on the 30th September 2019. The respondent has been fully appraised of the details of the complainant’s case during the internal appeals process and so will not suffer any material prejudice to adequately deal with the complaint. I have also taken into account medical evidence that this matter has caused mental distress to the complainant. In the interest of all parties the matter should be adjudicated upon and a determination made, without prejudice to the merits of the complaint. On examination of the 2021/2022 admissions criteria the alleged prohibited conduct continues. In accordance with section 21(3) and allowing for the particular circumstances as detailed it is fair and reasonable that I direct that section 21(2) shall not apply and that the matter is properly before me for Adjudication.

Having determined that the complaint is not statute barred I now turn to the substantive complaint.

In a letter to the complainant dated 27th September 2019, the School states:

“As per our enrolment policy pupils of Church of Ireland faith attending anonymised National School…have priority when it comes to enrolment in First Year.”

In reviewing all the selection criteria detailed in section 5 of the School’s admission policy for 2020/2021 and 2021/2022 there is only one reference to a religious faith which is Church of Ireland. The reference is in connection to receiving priority for selection subject to attending a named primary school. It also states in the policy that:

“All Applicants in this category will be verified by the Church of Ireland parish office in anonymised”.

The complainant states that prima facie these are facts that give rise to an inference of discrimination that in turn are required to be rebutted by the respondent. Section 3 of the Act states:

3.— For the purposes of this Act discrimination shall be taken to occur —

(a) 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) or, if appropriate, subsection (3B) in this Act referred to as the ‘discriminatory grounds’ which —

(i) exists,

(ii) existed but no longer exists,

(iii) may exist in the future, or

(iv) is imputed to the person concerned,

And subsection 2 states:

(2) As between any two persons, the discriminatory grounds (and the descriptions of those grounds for the purposes of this Act) are:

(a) that one is male and the other is female (the “gender ground”),

(b) that they are of different civil status (the “civil status ground”),

(c) that one has family status and the other does not or that one has a different family status from the other (the “family status ground”),

(d) that they are of different sexual orientation (the “sexual orientation ground”),

(e) that one has a different religious belief from the other, or that one has a religious belief and the other has not (the “religion ground”),

The complainant must establish facts of significance that give rise to a presumption that prohibited conduct has occurred:

38A. — (1) Where in any proceedings facts are established by or on behalf of a person from which it may be presumed that prohibited conduct has occurred in relation to him or her, it is for the respondent to prove the contrary.

On the facts established by the complainant that priority is given to Church of Ireland students from the said primary school over and above other students of different religious beliefs or none for admission to the post-primary School for the admission year 2020/2021 and continued, a prima facie case has been made out where it may be presumed that prohibited conduct has occurred in relation to the complainant and that prohibited conduct continues.

The 2021-2022 Admissions Policy maintains the priority selection for Church of Ireland students and also provides more comprehensive statements about the Ethos of the School. It was placed into evidence during the hearing as a document that accurately reflects that Ethos including its Religious Values:

“ETB schools are state, multidenominational, coeducational schools underpinned by the core values of Excellence in Education, Care, Equality, Community and Respect”.

“In ETB schools, students of all religions and beliefs are treated equally.”

“The Philosophy of anonymised College is one of inclusiveness in which the College supports the principles of partnership, equality of access and participation in the school.”

“Anonymised College is a designated Community College. Designated Community Colleges are established by the signing of a model agreement between an ETB and the local Catholic Bishop and/or religious congregation. anonymised ETB is the patron of the school. The model agreement provides for the participation of the Catholic Archbishop of Dublin and the Church of Ireland in the organisation and management of the community college on an ongoing basis.”

“Anonymised College was established in year anonymised in a spirit of partnership between anonymised ETB and the Catholic Archbishop of Dublin (3 Nominees) and the Church of Ireland (1 member). The inherited traditions, values and founding intentions of anonymised ETB, the Catholic Archbishop of Dublin and the Church of Ireland remain enshrined in the characteristic spirit and in the life of our school”

“Our school is a state, co-educational, multi-denominational school underpinned by the core values of:

· Excellence in Education

· Care

· Equality

· Community and

· Respect

“Anonymised College is multi-denominational. We welcome, respect and support students of all religions and beliefs”

“Accordingly, anonymised College shall not discriminate in its admission of a Student based on the following grounds:

2.5 Religion of the Student or Applicant”

“It is important to understand that our school does not provide ‘religious instruction’ and therefore the legal requirements to advise of the option to opt-out of religious instruction does not arise in this school. There is an important distinction between ‘religious instruction’ and ‘religious education’

· Religious instruction is a term used in Ireland to indicate instruction in accordance with the rites, practices and teachings of a particular religion or denomination for pupils of that religious tradition.

· Religious education is open to all pupils regardless of their commitment to any particular religion or worldview. It seeks to contribute to the spiritual and moral development of all student equally.

As ETB schools are ‘multi-denominational’, anonymised College supports the provision of religious education that caters for all students regardless of their religious or non-religious beliefs.”

Section 7 of the Act refers to Educational establishments:

7.— (1) In this section “educational establishment” means a preschool service within the meaning of Part VII of the Child Care Act, 1991, a primary or post-primary school, an institution providing adult, continuing or further education, or a university or any other third-level or higher-level institution, whether or not supported by public funds.

(2) An educational establishment shall not discriminate in relation to—

(a) the admission or the terms or conditions of admission of a person as a student to the establishment,

(b) the access of a student to any course, facility or benefit provided by the establishment,

(c) any other term or condition of participation in the establishment by a student, or

(d) the expulsion of a student from the establishment or any other sanction against the student.

(3) An educational establishment does not discriminate under subsection (2) by reason only that—

(a) where the establishment is not a third-level institution and admits students of one gender only, it refuses to admit as a student a person who is not of that gender,

(b) where the establishment is an institution established for the purpose of providing training to ministers of religion and admits students of only one gender or religious belief, it refuses to admit as a student a person who is not of that gender or religious belief,

(c) where the establishment is a school (other than a recognised primary school) providing primary or post-primary education to students and the objective of the school is to provide education in an environment which promotes certain religious values, it admits persons of a particular religious denomination in preference to others,

(ca) where the establishment is a school providing primary or post-primary education to students and the objective of the school is to provide education in an environment which promotes certain religious values, it refuses to admit as a student a person who is not of a particular religious denomination and it is proved that the refusal is essential to maintain the ethos of the school,

The respondent argues that is complies with the Equal Status Acts and it justifies its selection of Church of Ireland students based on the model agreement that governs how the school is run. The school has a particular Ethos informed by the tradition of the ETB, Catholic Church and Church of Ireland Faiths. While a multi-denominational school the Church of Ireland ethos and traditions are visible in the School’s calendar. The number of Church of Ireland students was 4 during the 2020/2021 admission to first year. The model agreement in place goes back to the very beginnings of the School and included a key objective to provide Church of Ireland students with an educational environment that respected their tradition and was non-fee paying. It must be understood in that light.

A key legal consideration relates to the exceptions as detailed in section 7 of the Act referring to Educational Establishments. This section provides that in certain instances as detailed when either giving priority or rejecting an application on Religious grounds that conduct may be deemed non-discriminatory.

It would apply if the objective of the school is to provide education in an environment which promotes certain religious values and it admits persons of a particular religious denomination in preference to others.

Having carefully reviewed the Admission’s policy of the School and the evidence provided by both the complainant and respondent with regard to the ethos of the School and having particular regard to the following statements from the most current policy (2021/2022) as evidence of that Ethos with specific reference to what religious values it promotes and how that determines its admission policy based on those religious values:

“Our school is a state, co-educational, multi-denominational school underpinned by the core values of:

· Excellence in Education

· Care

· Equality

· Community and

· Respect

“Anonymised College is multi-denominational. We welcome, respect and support students of all religions and beliefs”

“Accordingly, anonymised College shall not discriminate in its admission of a Student based on the following grounds:

2.5 Religion of the Student or Applicant”

I have concluded that section 7 (3) (c) or indeed section 7 (3) (ca) cannot logically apply based on the stated Admission’s Policy of the school not to discriminate based on the Religion of the Student/ Applicant.

The complainant has established on the facts that priority is given to Church of Ireland students from the said primary school over and above other students of different religious beliefs or none for admission to the post-primary School. A prima facie case has been made out where it may be presumed that prohibited conduct has occurred in relation to the complainant and that prohibited conduct continues. Section 7 (2) states:

(2) An educational establishment shall not discriminate in relation to—

(a) the admission or the terms or conditions of admission of a person as a student to the establishment,

As the stated policy of the School is not to discriminate in its admission of a student based on Religion of the student or applicant it cannot rely on 7 (3) (c) or (ca) to rebut the presumption that prohibited conduct continues.

(3) An educational establishment does not discriminate under subsection (2) by reason only that—

For these reasons I determine that the respondent did engage in prohibited conduct as it is the stated policy of the School to be multi-denominational and not to favour any one religious faith or none over one another when deciding who it admits into first year. The respondent has not disputed the fact that it does give priority to Church of Ireland students and contends that under section 7(3)(c) it is allowed to do so as the objective of the school is to provide education in an environment which promotes certain religious values, it admits persons of a particular religious denomination in preference to others.

There is no evidence in the current documented policy provided at the Adjudication hearing that the School has an objective to provide education in an environment which promotes certain religious values in accordance with Section 7 and so admits persons of a particular religious denomination in preference to others.

The School states it provides Religious Education and contrasts how such education differs to Religious instruction:

“Religious instruction is a term used in Ireland to indicate instruction in accordance with the rites, practices and teaching of a particular religion or denomination of that religious tradition”

Religious education is open to all pupils regardless of their commitment to any particular religion or worldview…

As ETB schools are multi-denominational, anonymised College supports the provision of religious education that caters for all students regardless of their religious or non-religious beliefs.”

Based on the statements in the current Admission policy which describes the School Ethos and its values, including equality of treatment irrespective of religious faith, it is difficult to reconcile how giving preference to Church of Ireland students is consistent with that stated objective while at the same time it does admit and give preference to a particular religious denomination. The admission’s policy of the College states that it provides religious education, is multi-denominational and also contains the very explicit statement that it does not discriminate based on religion. The School denies that it is discriminating, relying on section 7(3)(c) of the Act that it in fact does give preference to provide education in an environment which promotes certain religious values, it admits persons of a particular religious denomination in preference to others. The stated School position in its admission policy not to give preference based on religion and at the same time relying on Section 7(3)(c) that it does give preference to one religious denomination in order to provide education in an environment that promotes certain religious values are irreconcilable.

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.

The complainant has established facts that priority is given to Church of Ireland students from the said primary school over and above other students of different religious beliefs or none for admission to the post-primary School, a prima facie case has been made out where it may be presumed that prohibited conduct has occurred in relation to the complainant and that prohibited conduct continues. Section 7 (2) states:

(2) An educational establishment shall not discriminate in relation to—

(a) the admission or the terms or conditions of admission of a person as a student to the establishment,

As it is the stated policy of the School not to discriminate in its admission of a student based on Religion of the student or applicant it cannot rely on 7 (3) (c) or (ca) to rebut the presumption that prohibited conduct continues.

(3) An educational establishment does not discriminate under subsection (2) by reason only that—

And the School’s admission policy states:

“Anonymised College is multi-denominational. We welcome, respect and support students of all religions and beliefs”

“Accordingly, anonymised College shall not discriminate in its admission of a Student based on the following grounds:

2.5 Religion of the Student or Applicant”

For these reasons I determine that the respondent did engage in prohibited conduct.

Section 27 states:

27.— (1) Subject to this section, the types of redress for which a decision of the Director of the Workplace Relations Commission under section 25 may provide are either or both of the following as may be appropriate in the circumstances:

(a) an order for compensation for the effects of the prohibited conduct concerned; or

(b) an order that a person or persons specified in the order take a course of action which is so specified.

(2) The maximum amount which may be ordered by the Director of the Workplace Relations Commission by way of compensation under subsection (1)(a) shall be the maximum amount that could be awarded by the District Court in civil cases in contract.

In accordance with Section 27 (1)(b) having found that the respondent has and continues to engage in prohibited conduct I order that the respondent take the following course of action:

1. That the respondent ceases to give pupils of Church of Ireland faith attending anonymised National School priority when it comes to enrolment in First Yearand order that they amend their admission’s policy to ensure that the prohibited conduct ends.

2. That the School provide a place to the complainant in 2nd year commencing 2021-2022 having regard to the recommendation of her Doctor and the mental distress and anxiety arising from her unsuccessful application associated with the prohibited conduct. In deciding on this specific course of action I am doing so specifically relating to admission to 2nd year and without establishing any precedent for 1st year admissions at the School and solely determined on the unique facts of this complaint.

Furthermore I have exercised my discretion to anonymise the parties on the facts that the complainant is a minor and having regard to the medical evidence presented at the hearing.

Dated: November 19th 2020

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Brian Dalton

Key Words:

Religious Discrimination-School Admissions