Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Antoni  Lesiński

James O'Flanagan

Representatives

Darach MacNamara B.L., instructed by Brian S. McGrane of McGrane Solicitors

Act

Complaint/Dispute Reference No.

Date of Receipt

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

CA-00055549-001

14/03/2023

The complainant has made a complaint under the Equal Status Acts in relation to his work as an interpreter.

The complainant submits he is a freelance interpreter. On 16 September 2022 he attended the respondent’s clinic to work as an interpreter between the respondent and the attending patient. When he entered the clinic there was dispute about the wearing of masks which resulted in him being asked to leave. He claims this amounts to discrimination on the grounds of disability because the medical reasons giving him an exemption to the wearing of a mask were not considered.

The respondent confirms the incident took place. He was concerned at the complainant’s lack of social distancing in a medical environment and asked him to leave.

The Equal Status Act 2000 as amended a service at section 2 is defined as:

“service” means a service or facility of any nature which is available to the public generally or a section of the public, and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, includes—

(a) access to and the use of any place,

(b) facilities for—

(i) banking, insurance, grants, loans, credit or financing,

(ii) entertainment, recreation or refreshment,

(iii) cultural activities, or

(iv) transport or travel,

(c) a service or facility provided by a club (whether or not it is a club holding a certificate of registration under the Registration of Clubs Acts, 1904 to 1999) which is available to the public generally or a section of the public, whether on payment or without payment, and

(d) a professional or trade service,

but does not include pension rights (within the meaning of the Employment Equality Act, 1998) or a service or facility in relation to which that Act applies

The purpose of the Act is to prohibit discrimination in the disposing of goods or the provision of services. The definition of service in the legislation is as follows: “service” means a service or facility of any nature which is available to the public generally or a section of the public”

It is clear that the complainant attended the respondent’s clinic to work as an interpreter. Indeed, the evidence at the hearing was clear that the respondent ensured the complainant’s attendance form was completed. This would ensure the complainant received payment for attending, even though he did not provide the interpretation service.

I am satisfied that the nexus between the complainant and the respondent does not constitute a service or facility generally available to the public or section of the public. 

Having carefully examined all of the evidence I find that the matter before me does not constitute a service as prescribed under the Equal Status Acts.  In the circumstances, I find that the complainant does not have locus standi to bring a claim under the Acts. Accordingly, I find I have no jurisdiction to hear the within complaint. 

Following the hearing the complainant submitted a request for his complaint to be heard under the Employment Equality Acts. I cannot carry out this amendment as it came after the hearing, when the complainant was given full opportunity to make any submissions. For a claim under the Employment Equality Acts to be considered the complainant would need to submit a fresh claim.

For the reasons given above I find I have no jurisdiction in the within claim as the complainant does not have locus standi to bring a claim under the Equal Status Acts.

Not a service – no jurisdiction