Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

When is a publican entitled to bar someone?

  • 02-10-2012 03:38PM
    #1
    Ormus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,916 ✭✭✭


    I have been looking at the Equal Status Act 2004, and it lists 9 grounds under which a publican can't refuse to serve someone.

    It doesn't state anywhere in the Act whether this list is exhaustive or not. One would think there should be a line somewhere which states that the list isn't exhaustive, and that other forms of discrimination may be prohibited.

    Anyone know of any guide issued by the Vintner's Association or something along those lines?


Comments

  • #2
    Procrastastudy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,224 ✭✭✭Procrastastudy


    Ormus wrote: »
    I have been looking at the Equal Status Act 2004, and it lists 9 grounds under which a publican can't refuse to serve someone.

    It doesn't state anywhere in the Act whether this list is exhaustive or not. One would think there should be a line somewhere which states that the list isn't exhaustive, and that other forms of discrimination may be prohibited.

    Anyone know of any guide issued by the Vintner's Association or something along those lines?

    AFIAK the list is exhaustive - why would someone bar someone on one f those grounds anyway? Did you expect pisshead to be listed in the act? :D


  • #3
    crosshair12
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35 ✭crosshair12


    Procrastastudy wrote: »
    Ormus wrote: »
    I have been looking at the Equal Status Act 2004, and it lists 9 grounds under which a publican can't refuse to serve someone.

    It doesn't state anywhere in the Act whether this list is exhaustive or not. One would think there should be a line somewhere which states that the list isn't exhaustive, and that other forms of discrimination may be prohibited.

    Anyone know of any guide issued by the Vintner's Association or something along those lines?

    AFIAK the list is exhaustive - why would someone bar someone on one f those grounds anyway? Did you expect pisshead to be listed in the act? :D


    Is there a provision which allows a publican to refuse service in order to maintain an orderly house, which would be a term of his licence? This might act as a 'catch-all' provision allowing a publican to refuse service/bar someone...


  • #4
    Ormus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,916 ✭✭✭Ormus


    Well it's not actually pissheads that I'm concerned about. More about someone who has been charged with, but not convicted of a crime, and the (hypothetical) publican wants to know if they can bar the person.


  • #5
    mud
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,699 ✭✭✭mud


    Ormus wrote: »
    I have been looking at the Equal Status Act 2004, and it lists 9 grounds under which a publican can't refuse to serve someone.

    It doesn't state anywhere in the Act whether this list is exhaustive or not. One would think there should be a line somewhere which states that the list isn't exhaustive, and that other forms of discrimination may be prohibited.

    Anyone know of any guide issued by the Vintner's Association or something along those lines?

    Surely the management can bar anyone they want to? Isn't there always a sign to the effect: "Management reserve the right to refuse admission"?


  • #6
    dats_right
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,169 ✭✭✭dats_right


    A publican is free to discriminate against anybody in as capricious and frivolous a manner as they wish, provided they don't do so on one of the nine unlawful grounds under the Equal Status Act.

    Discrimiation per se is not unlawful, it is only when that discrimination is based on one of the nine grounds that it becomes unlawful. This point is very often not fully appreciated by people.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    ScouseMouse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,070 ✭✭✭ScouseMouse


    dats_right wrote: »
    A publican is free to discriminate against anybody in as capricious and frivolous a manner as they wish, provided they don't do so on one of the nine unlawful grounds under the Equal Status Act.

    Discrimiation per se is not unlawful, it is only when that discrimination is based on one of the nine grounds that it becomes unlawful. This point is very often not fully appreciated by people.

    Thats pretty much it. A publican can bar anyone they like, anyone at all. If they are traveller, gay, coloured, or any of the other named reasons. It does not matter AS LONG AS, its NOT because they are a traveller, gay, or coloured.

    If challenged, the publican must be able to show they were barred for a reason which is not one of the nine items mentioned in the Equal Status Act.

    They were drunk, they were previously abusive, they were dirty and smelly, they were wearing tracksuits to a night club, etc etc etc. These are reasons you can use. But the publican must be able to prove, if required, it was for another reason not covered under the act.


Advertisement