Toner, McCarthy and others v. Foley (District Court, 7th September 2021)

Five members of the Traveller Community were successful in their claim of discrimination in relation to a refusal of entry to a licenced premises (an outdoor music festival). Note: This case is an unreported District Court case and the information has been collected first hand via Court attendance, so there is no full judgment for this case.

Facts 

The five applicants attended the Castletown Music Festival on the 16th of August 2019.  The Licence holder, a local pub owner, was not involved in the running of the event. The event was run by the Castletown Development Committee which fully indemnified the licence holder.  

On the night of the 16th of August 2019, the women arrived at the festival at around 8 pm and were told by the security officer that they would not be admitted. They asked him the reason for their refusal and he told them that the management confirmed that only locals were to be allowed in. The women saw other people being admitted who were not ‘local’. The women told the court that after pressing the security guard again he said that management had instructed security that ‘no travellers’ were to be allowed in. The women left and were extremely distressed by the refusal of admittance. 

Issues 

Discrimination experienced in a licensed premises amounts to 'prohibited conduct' under s.19 Intoxicating Liquor Act 2003. The case involved discrimination under one of the established grounds, membership of the Traveller Community. The onus was on the applicants to establish prima facie that they had been discriminated against (Mitchell v Southern Health Board [2001] ELR 201). 

Reasoning  

The women gave evidence as to their experience on the night of the 16th of August 2019. The case hinged on the evidence of the women who recounted not being allowed in and being told ‘locals only’ despite being from the area. The respondents evidence was provided by a committee member and the security guard who both argued the woman had been blocked from entering due to a security issue involving a different group of Travellers and that they had not been treated differently as everyone had been stopped from entering at that time. The Judge did not find this compelling and found that they had been discriminated against on the balance of probabilities. 

Conclusion: 

The Court found in favour of the applicants and awarded them the sum of €200 per person together with legal costs. 

The Judge recognised that the women had been wronged and was reluctant to award a higher sum as the respondent was a charity and carried out beneficial works in the community. The Judge made a statement about how the women had won and done a great deal for their community by coming to court.