ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00052730
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Mahdi Hajjijama | Dunnes Stores |
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties |
|
|
Representatives | In person | Ms E-J Walsh BL instructed by Justin Condon, Solicitor; Murphy Condon Solicitors. |
Complaint(s):
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 21 Equal Status Act, 2000 | CA-00064125-001 | 18/06/2024 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 27/09/2024
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Jim Dolan
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 25 of the Equal Status Act, 2000, 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:
This complaint, submitted under section 21 of the Equal Status Act, 2000 was received by the Workplace Relations Commission on 18th June 2024. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
Preliminary Issue. The Complainant was involved in an incident in the Respondent’s retail premises on 13th February 2023. Following this incident, the Complainant appeared in the District Court on 11th October 2023 where he was fined €700, he appealed this judgement and had it reversed by the Circuit Court on 15th March 2024. The Complainant submitted his complaint to the Workplace Relations Commission on 18th June 2024. The Complainant contends that this was the reason for his late submission of the complaint. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
Preliminary Issue. Details of Complaint. The complaint concerns the Complainant's allegation of discrimination and harassment on the grounds of religion and race. The incident giving rise to the complaint occurred on 13 February 2023 when the Complainant alleges he was physically assaulted and racially abused at Dunnes Stores', St Stephen's Green premises. The Notification of the Complaint is made by way of Form ES.1 and is dated 25 April 2024. This was the first notification of the Complaint given by the Complainant to the Respondent. This Notification was received by the Respondent on 18 June 2024, being over 16 months post incident. Accordingly, the Notification of Complaint is significantly out of time given the Complainant's failure to send the Notification to the Respondent within the statutory period of two months from the alleged incident, as provided for by section 21(2)(a) of the Equal Status Act 2000. The Respondent objects to the within Complaint and Notification thereof, on the basis that they are out of time. |
Findings and Conclusions:
Section 21, subsection (2) of the Equal Status Act 2000 reads as follows: 21. (2) 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, 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. Section 21 (6) of the Act reads as follows: 21. (6) (a) Subject to subsection (3)(a)(ii) and (7), a claim for redress in respect of prohibited conduct may not be referred under this section after the end of the period of 6 months from the date of the occurrence of the prohibited conduct to which the case relates or, as the case may be, the date of its most recent occurrence. (b) On application by a complainant the Director General of the Workplace Relations Commission or, as the case may be, the Circuit Court may, for reasonable cause, direct that in relation to the complaint paragraph (a) shall have effect as if for the reference to a period of 6 months there were substituted a reference to such period not exceeding 12 months as is specified in the direction; and where such a direction is given, this Part shall have effect accordingly. In the instant case no such application was made by or on behalf of the Complainant. The preliminary argument presented by the Respondent is strong and I have to adhere to the Equal Status Act 2000 as shown above. The complaint was not made within the time limits specified in statute and therefore I have no legal jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complaint as presented fails.
|
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 complaint was not made within the time limits specified in statute and therefore I have no legal jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complaint as presented fails.
|
Dated: 21-10-24
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Jim Dolan
Key Words:
Equal Status Act 2000; Time Limits. |