ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00050629
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Nadine Lattimore | Juliya Susan Reji |
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | {text} | {text} |
Representatives |
|
|
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-00062185-001 | 13/03/2024 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 25/04/2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Breiffni O'Neill
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.
Specifically, I conducted a remote hearing in accordance with the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2020 and Statutory Instrument 359/2020 which designates the Workplace Relations Commission as a body empowered to hold remote hearings.
The Complainant gave evidence on affirmation. The Respondent gave evidence on oath. The opportunity for cross-examination was afforded to the parties.
Background:
The Complainant stated that she was discriminated against when the Respondent refused to accommodate her guide dog when she booked accommodation in her home. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant made a reservation with the Respondent via booking.com on 7 December 2023, intending to arrive at the property on 16 December 2023. A confirmation code for 1 adult and 1 child was subsequently received On 7 December 2023, shortly after booking, the Complainant contacted the Respondent, informing them that she would be accompanied by her Guide Dog. On 8 December 2023, the Respondent refused to accommodate the Complainant owing to her Guide Dog. On 9 December 2023, following the Respondent’s refusal to accommodate the confirmed reservation, the Complainant contacted Booking.com customer services. Following multiple communications both with Booking.com and the Respondent, on the 12th of December 2023, owing to the period of free cancellation ending midnight 12th of December, the Complainant cancelled the reservation. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent stated that she has a deep-rooted fear of dogs which was why she initially refused the Complainant’s request. She stated that she subsequently offered to move to a friend’s house so that the Complainant could stay in her house along with her guide dog. The Complainant chose not to accept her offer. |
Findings and Conclusions:
Preliminary Matter: I note that the Respondent resides in Northern Ireland and that the accommodation the Complainant sought to book was in Northern Ireland. The Equal Status Acts 2000–2018 apply specifically to the Republic of Ireland however. While the legislation doesn’t explicitly state that it applies only within the Republic of Ireland, this is legally assumed—Irish law operates within Irish territory unless otherwise stated. As a result, the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC), which handles complaints under these Acts, only has the authority to investigate and adjudicate incidents of discrimination that occur within the Republic of Ireland. It does not have jurisdiction over acts that happen elsewhere. Accordingly, I do not have jurisdiction in respect of this complaint. |
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 in respect of this complaint for the reasons set out above. |
Dated: 22-05-25
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Breiffni O'Neill
Key Words:
|