Shop refusing alcohol sales to under 21's

Not a legal expert but I think the idea is that they challenge people for ID if they look 21 or younger. I doubt that they would then refuse to sell the alcohol if the person had ID that showed they were 19 for example.

There is no obligation on the shop to sell you anything.

The equal status act is not relevant here.

Nope.

Some pubs have 21+ or 23+ policies.

None that I know, it was common maybe 20 years ago but now it’s illegal. In fact a supermarket was fined €1,000 by the Equality Authority for discrimination on the grounds of age. This was because a kid who was 18 was refused a bottle of spirits on the basis it was only over 21’s for alcohol sales. He had ID.

i don’t know of any pub anymore who discriminate based on legal age, do you ? Opening themselves up to a hell of a lawsuit.

if it’s legal for you to buy alcohol you can’t discriminate on age.

Yes, but would there not have to be a legitimate reason to discriminate? If he appeared drunk, abusive, just being under 21 ? Can’t see where that’s allowed. Not being allowed spirits a product readily available...

why Do you need ID to buy 0% Beer?

next they will be asking for ID to buy Coke

For some reason 0% beer & wine is still classed in law as beer & wine thus meaning you must be over 18 to make the purchase.

Non-alcoholic drinks are in fact partially alcoholic (very very small amounts - usually between 0.3 and 0.5% ABV) and are still either "beer" or "wine".

That aside, the so-called non alcoholic drinks still go through the the fermentation/distillation process, they are classed as intoxicating liquor, which includes any beer, wine or other fermented or distilled liquor.

In the US and Canada though, the lack of any vague notion of critical thought is in full display when buying alcohol. I remember my mam getting refused in one place when we were visiting family there before, despite her being nearly 50 and looking at best, maybe around 40.

I was 16, looked very young for my age at that point, and walked in about an hour later to buy what I wanted on a very makeshift fake id that may as well have been out together on Art Attack. Got served from the same person, no questions asked.

Nope,

its was a time ago reading it, but if you google the equal status act it should tell you everything re: the law

they can’t have any sign up that indicates discrimination based on age. If you are of legal age to purchase alcohol, unless you are drunk, causing a danger to yourself or others... you should be able to make the transaction.

Thats a bit stupid on their behalf , why would you refuse them on the grounds of age when you CAN refuse them on the basis of being intoxicated....potential danger to staff, fellow patrons and themselves .

News piece about the case: https://www.irishtimes.com/news/off-licence-fined-for-refusing-18-year-old-1.356935

As I explained above, it's not relevant for two reasons:

• The 18 year old wasn't prevented from purchasing alcohol, they were prevented from purchasing spirits. They would have been allowed purchase beer. That puts them outside the situation catered for in the legislation
• The case was in April 2003 - section 4 wasn't inserted until later that year (possibly even because of that case, although that's just speculation on my part)

With regard to the different treatment of "alcohol-free" products, from what I can see, it appears to be legal to sell them without requiring age verification. Beer is defined in legislation as exceeding 0.5% ABV (Finance Act 2003, Section 73). However, retailers appear to have taken a general policy of treating all alcohol-like products as age-verified products. This is likely the case for two reasons:

• appearance of responsibility - avoidance of promoting alcohol to under-18s (
• ease of implementation - rather than having retail staff need to scrutinise every bottle sold to identify whether they're above or below 0.5%, just require ID for all alcohol-like sales

The Equal Status Act also has a "good faith" exemption in section 15:

• (2) Action taken in good faith by or on behalf of the holder of a licence or other authorisation which permits the sale of intoxicating liquor, for the sole purpose of ensuring compliance with the provisions of the Licensing Acts, 1833 to 1999, shall not constitute discrimination.

Even though it may be strictly legal for an under-18 to purchase alcohol-free beer, that doesn't mean a retailer's policy of not selling it is considered illegal. I'm not aware of any cases where such a policy has been challenged.

EDIT: article saying similar, although from a UK perspective: https://steadydrinker.com/articles/id-alcohol-free-beer/

Why do you keep repeating this when you've been shown that you're incorrect? Section 15(4) of the Equal Status Act: