Sinéad Lucey

The family had initially pursued both a judicial review and a statutory appeal following a Circuit Court ruling which overturned a finding in the Workplace Relations Commission of discrimination by a hotel.

The High Court determined last year that the Circuit Court hearing was unfair in circumstances where the presiding judge was overly-interventionist and conducted a large part of the examination of the witnesses.

The hotel appealed to the Court of Appeal, arguing that the family should not have been allowed to take a judicial review.

In a judgment handed down yesterday, Mr Justice Charles Meenan found that it was appropriate for the family to take the judicial review case because it allowed the High Court judge to make findings of fact, while a statutory appeal would have been limited to questions of law.

He noted: “The [High Court] judge was somewhat critical of the respondents pursuing both a statutory appeal and judicial review proceedings at the same time. I do not share that criticism.”

Legal rights group FLAC, which represented the family, said the family had pursued both options as a “precautionary measure” until the High Court granted permission for the judicial review.

Welcoming yesterday’s ruling, Sinéad Lucey, FLAC’s managing solicitor, said: “This is the latest chapter in a long-running case that has now been heard by the Workplace Relations Commission, Circuit Court, High Court and the Court of Appeal.

“Our clients continue to demonstrate remarkable perseverance and bravery.

“The decision of the Court of Appeal provides legal clarity and underscores the very important role of judicial review in upholding the rule of law and access to justice for people who have been subject to unfair decision-making processes in lower courts, tribunals or by State bodies.”