The Circuit Court has affirmed a Workplace Relations Commission decision and dismissed an appeal by Emma Barry concerning the Medical Council’s handling of a complaint about a doctor’s professional practice.
Judge Ní Chúlacháin delivered the decision on 7 December 2023 in the Dublin Circuit County of the City of Dublin. Barry was not present for the appeal hearing, which proceeded uncontested.
In 2021, Barry complained to the Medical Council about the professional practice of Dr Leena Naughton. The Council investigated under section 59 of the Medical Practitioners Act 2007. In June 2021, it said there was insufficient cause for further action, and on 7 July 2021 it considered the Preliminary Proceedings Committee’s opinion and decided to take no further action.
Barry referred a complaint to the WRC on 6 January 2022, alleging that the Council’s conduct of the investigation amounted to discrimination and harassment on grounds of gender, race and disability, contrary to the Equal Status Acts. The WRC heard the complaint on 7 February 2023 and issued its decision on 29 June 2023. It found that the Council could rely on the statutory exemption in section 14(1) and had not discriminated. It also concluded that a harassment claim concerning a submission by Naughton would be against the document’s author, rather than the Council that received it, and that this aspect was also covered by section 14(1).
On appeal, the Circuit Court held that the Council’s statutory duty to investigate and make decisions under the 2007 Act was an action required by an enactment and fell within section 14(1) of the Equal Status Act. The judge also found that the Council was exercising a quasi-judicial decision-making function, which did not come within the Act’s definition of a service. She said those conclusions were sufficient to dispose of the appeal.
The judge added that, if it were necessary to go further, the Council would also have judicial immunity from suit in carrying out its statutory adjudicative functions, absent an express countervailing provision. The court affirmed the WRC adjudication officer’s decision and dismissed the appeal. The judgment does not make findings on the underlying discrimination and harassment allegations.