The Irish Times - Friday, December 10, 2010

Traveller wins discrimination case over school's 'father rule'

In this section »

CAROL COULTER, Legal Affairs Editor

IN A case that could have widespread implications for schools’ admission policies, the Equality Tribunal has ruled that the Christian Brothers High School in Clonmel indirectly discriminated against Travellers.

The Co Tipperary school operated a policy of prioritising applicants on three grounds: being a Roman Catholic, attending a local feeder school and having or having had a brother or father attend the school.

The tribunal found that giving priority to those who had a father in the school was indirectly discriminatory as very few Travellers of that generation had attended secondary school. Many schools have a “father rule”, giving places to the children of past pupils.

John Stokes, whose mother Mary took the case on his behalf through the Irish Traveller Movement (ITM) independent law centre, was the eldest son of the family and a pupil in the local feeder primary school. He applied to the school in November 2009 and the family was told the number of applicants exceeded the number of places. The school’s enrolment policy was outlined.

As a Roman Catholic and a pupil of the feeder school, John met two of the three criteria, but failed to get a place in the school. It was pointed out he could not meet the third criterion because as the eldest child he could not have a brother in the school, and as the first male in his family to progress to secondary school he could not have had a parent who attended the school.

Mrs Stokes appealed unsuccessfully to the Department of Education and Science. Through the ITM law centre she then complained to the Equality Tribunal on the grounds that requiring an applicant to have a family member, specifically a parent, who had previously attended the school, disproportionately affects Travellers.

The school denied its policy was discriminatory and pointed out that a number of Travellers had progressed through the school, and that it had policies designed to give access to those who were disadvantaged in various ways.

The Equality Tribunal upheld the complaint and ordered that the school immediately offer a place to John and also review its admissions policy to ensure it does not indirectly discriminate against pupils on any of the grounds covered by Section 3 (2) of the Equal Status Act.

The ruling could have implications for other schools who prioritise the children of past pupils, according to barrister Eilis Barry, a specialist in discrimination law. Other groups who could be disadvantaged by such a policy would include immigrants.

“It is important that schools review their admissions policies in this regard,” she said, a view echoed by Ramona Quinn, the solicitor with the ITM law centre who took the case. The decision can be appealed to the Circuit Court, and the Circuit Court’s decision could be further appealed to the High Court on a point of law.