This case involved a claim that the worker had been discriminated against, by the respondent, on the age ground, resulting in her failing to be promoted to the position of Deputy Principal. The complainant had been shortlisted for interview in a competition for the role, but had not been the successful candidate. Instead, a colleague who was 16 years younger was appointed. The complainant claimed that her age was a factor in this decision and it had adversely affected her in the competition. The complainant successfully established a number of facts, including the following, which raised a presumption of discrimination; the Principal addressed the Interview Panel at the commencement of the process, the Principal had given references to two candidates, the Principal served on the Interview Panel, the Principal gave the complainant considerably lower marks and the complainant was 16 years older than the successful candidate.

The Court held that it had been inappropriate for the Principal to provide references for 2 potential candidates and to brief the Interview Panel on matters which might influence their decision, particularly as she was a member of the Interview Panel herself. However, the Court found that each panel member had acted independently in their decision making as their assessments were solely based on every candidates' performance at interview. The Court also found that the questions asked at interview were open in nature and provided all candidates with ample opportunity to develop their answers and highlight their strengths and experience. Accordingly, the Court held that the complainant had prima facie grounds to form a view she had been discriminated against based on her age but the respondent had discharged their obligation to show that the decisions it took were free of any such discrimination.
https://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/Cases/2017/September/EDA1726.html