Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Liam  Hogan

Southlink N25 Ltd

Representatives

Not present

DAC BEACHCROFT

Act

Complaint/Dispute Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 21 Equal Status Act, 2000

CA-00060750-001

27/12/2023

The Complainant was involved in a dispute regarding the payment of a toll and claimed he was discriminated against because of a disability. The Respondent denied any discrimination.

A complaint was received by the Director General of the Workplace Relations Commission by Liam Hogan  on 27/12/2023 alleging that the Respondent contravened the provisions of the Equal Status Act 2000 in relation to him. The said complaint was referred to me for investigation. A hearing for that purpose was held on 5/9/2025. The Complainant had advised of a Representative but that said Representative advised she could not attend the scheduled Hearing in the days prior to the Hearing due to a personal issue. The Representative came off record and subsequently came back on record. The Hearing opened and was adjourned. The Hearing was rescheduled for 20/1/2026. Prior to the Hearing the named Complainant Representative, through her mother,  advised the WRC she was not the Complainants Representative but an Aid, that she was out sick, would only be attending one Hearing a month, he would not be attending the Hearing and the WRC should be organising an Aid..  The WRC Access Officer confirmed to the Adjudicator, in advance of the Hearing, no separate request for any special accommodation was received from the Complainant and that they had ample time to do so prior to the second Hearing. The Complainant was notified directly of the second Hearing by registered post. There was some confusion prior to the original Hearing as to the Complainants address as he had given the wrong county but this was resolved by the WRC with him prior to the second Hearing.  There was no appearance by or on behalf of the Complainant at the second Hearing. I am satisfied that the said complainant and the person he had identified as his Representative were informed in writing of the date, time and place at which the Hearing to investigate the complaint would be held. In these circumstances and in the absence of any evidence to the contrary having been adduced before me, I must conclude that the within complaint is not well-founded and I decide accordingly

Discrimination