The Circuit Court allowed the Road Safety Authority’s appeal against a Workplace Relations Commission decision that found it had indirectly discriminated against an anonymised applicant for international protection when it refused to accept her learner permit application.
Judge John O’Connor delivered the judgment on 30 July 2020 at the Four Courts in Dublin. The case was an appeal under the Equal Status Acts, not a constitutional challenge or an application for judicial review.
The applicant, identified in the judgment only as AB, applied for international protection in Ireland in 2015 and had lived in the State continuously since then. She held a Temporary Residence Certificate and worked in County Dublin while living in the south of Ireland.
In October 2018, she applied to the National Driver Licence Service for a learner permit and submitted her certificate. The service did not accept the application, saying it lacked valid evidence of her residency entitlement. She complained under the Equal Status Acts, arguing that the Road Safety Authority’s documentary requirements disadvantaged applicants for international protection, a group more likely to be of a different race or ethnic origin.
The WRC found indirect discrimination after a hearing in September 2019. It directed the Authority to meet AB about exchanging an Indian licence or, alternatively, to issue her a learner permit without charge; pay her €5,000 compensation; and amend its guidance notes.
On appeal, the Authority argued that the residence evidence requirement was required by the driving licence regulations and was justified by aims including checking normal residence, road safety and the integrity of the licensing system. AB argued that the regulations required normal residence but did not prescribe the particular documents the Authority demanded.
Judge O’Connor said he accepted the Authority’s account of the law under the Equal Status Acts. He found that AB’s residence in Ireland was for the purpose of pursuing her asylum application and that her residence status was not the same as that of citizens or people granted permission to enter and reside as immigrants. He did not accept that the Authority had discriminated against AB or other asylum applicants on grounds of race, saying it had applied existing law.
The judge also said the WRC decision had gone substantially beyond its remit under the Equal Status Acts. He allowed the Authority’s appeal. The judgment does not record any further order or a separate ruling on each of the remedies directed by the WRC.