The High Court refused Clare County Council’s application to stop the Equality Tribunal from hearing discrimination complaints brought against it by Traveller families. Mr Justice Hedigan ruled on 21 July 2011 that he was not satisfied there were grounds to prohibit the Tribunal from carrying out its statutory role. The complaints themselves remained undecided.
The Council had sought judicial review of the process, arguing that complaint forms submitted on behalf of the families lacked enough detail for it to know the case it had to answer. It also argued that the Tribunal should screen out complaints that appeared to be outside statutory time limits before holding hearings, and that the process was unfair because complainants could expand on their allegations through oral evidence.
The respondents said the complaints were valid on their face and that the Equality Officer could decide questions of timing and substance as part of the investigation. They argued that the Council had time to consider and respond to evidence presented by complainants, and that the Tribunal’s procedures were intended to be less formal than court proceedings.
The judge said the Equal Status Act allowed complainants to elaborate on the general outline set out in complaint forms. The Equality Officer could receive information and determine what was relevant, provided the Council was not taken by surprise or had adequate time to respond. The court also accepted that the Officer could decide whether to address the complaints’ receivability at a preliminary stage or during the hearing.
The judgment noted that complaints concerning about 96 families had been referred to the Tribunal. At the time of the judicial review, 18 families were still awaiting decisions, including the notice parties in this case and one other family. Five families had been heard and one case was partly heard; decisions in those five cases had been stayed during the court proceedings.
The Council had also sought to quash any decision granting redress to the notice parties. The judge said there was no decision to quash because none had issued in their cases. He refused the relief sought, leaving the Equality Tribunal to determine the pending complaints. The judgment did not decide whether the discrimination allegations were established.