ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00053755
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Lucy Joyce | Commiskeys Bar And Restaurant, Blackhorse Ave |
Representatives | Eamonn O'Hanrahan of E.M. O'Hanrahan 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-00065593-001 | 25/08/2024 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 06/02/2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: David James Murphy
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and 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:
The Complainant alleges that she was discriminated against while at the Respondent bar. She submitted a complaint under the Equal Status Act 2000 alongside another family member. These cases were scheduled together and the Complainant attended with her solicitor. Her family member did not. The Respondent was represented by four of its employees. Mr. Denis Byrne, Mr. Liam Healy, Mr. Martin Hardiman and Mr. Johan Keating.
A preliminary issue arose in that this complaint related to an alleged interaction on a licensed premises. I printed out a copy of Section 19 of the Intoxicating Liquor Act 2003 and provided it to both parties to make oral submissions on. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant’s solicitor submitted that the act created concurrent jurisdiction and that they had the option of submitting a complaint to either the District Court or the WRC and chose the WRC. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
Mr Hardiman, the Respondent’s group manager, submitted that they are not legal represented and have limited knowledge of the law. They are satisfied that they did not discriminate against the Complainant and are ready to demonstrate that if the hearing were to proceed. |
Findings and Conclusions:
The Respondent confirmed they are a licensed premises. The Complainant did not dispute this. Section 19 Intoxicating Liquor Act 2003 transferred jurisdiction of equal status act complaints to the District Court. It specifically states that: A person who claims that prohibited conduct has been directed against him or her on, or at the point of entry to, licensed premises may apply to the District Court for redress. It goes on to state that: The Act of 2000 shall cease to apply in relation to prohibited conduct occurring on, or at the point of entry to, licensed premises on or after the commencement of this section. This case was referred to me under the Act of 2000 and it concerns alleged discrimination on a licensed premises, as such I do not have jurisdiction to consider this matter. |
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.
I find that I do not have jurisdiction to consider the complaint. |
Dated: 10th February 2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: David James Murphy
Key Words:
|