INSURANCE COMPANY Eagle Star has asked the High Court to prevent the Equality Tribunal dealing with complaints of discrimination and victimisation by a senior civil servant over the 100 per cent loading of her income continuance policy.
Bernadette Treanor, herself an equality officer, has claimed the insurer had insinuated to others in 2002 that her policy had been loaded because she was overweight and due to “other incorrect reasons”.
In a complaint made in 2002 to the Equality Authority, Ms Treanor (49), of Dowdallshill, Newry Road, Dundalk, Co Louth, alleged discrimination on grounds of “disability” under the Equal Status Acts 2000-2004 (the Acts) and claimed the loading decision was based on “medical information” which was “no longer relevant”.
In early 2003, she made a second complaint alleging victimisation under the Acts, arising from the company’s action in sending a letter to her general practitioner relating to her policy being loaded.
She also brought a separate complaint against Eagle Star’s chief medical officer. Because Ms Treanor is an equality officer, the Equality Tribunal has assigned an external equality officer to investigate and decide the case.
Eagle Star has rejected the complaints and has said the loading of her cover was applied on the basis of information contained in a medical examination completed by its chief medical officer.
In a preliminary application which opened yesterday before Mr Justice John Hedigan, Eagle Star contends the Equality Authority has no jurisdiction to investigate the complaints. Paul Sreenan SC, for the company, argued there was no proper complaint of “disability” and Ms Treanor’s condition could not amount in law to a disability within the meaning of the Acts.
He also argued the delay in prosecuting the complaint should deprive the tribunal of jurisdiction to determine it.
He said Eagle Star had asked the director of the tribunal in October 2006 to dismiss the reference in light of that delay but that had not occurred.
In opposing the application, the Equality Tribunal contends the definition of “disability” under the Acts and whether Ms Treanor comes within that definition are all matters within the jurisdiction of the tribunal. It also argues the High Court has no jurisdiction to intervene at this stage in the proceedings before the tribunal.
The case arose after Ms Treanor sought income continuance cover in 2002 under the Association of Higher Civil and Public Servants Income Continuance Plan with Eagle Star. She was told in August 2002 she was being accepted into the plan with a loading of 100 per cent of the normal premium. The loading was to be incorporated into the overall scheme but she would have to disclose the rating when applying for further policies, she was informed.
That same month, Ms Treanor made complaints against Eagle Star of discrimination on grounds of disability. In a further complaint of February 2003, she said she had been informed of a copy letter issued by Eagle Star to her GP in October 2002 and the issuing of that letter constituted victimisation of her under the Acts.
She said she believed Eagle Star had issued that letter, which informed her GP of her policy loading, as a direct response to her first complaint alleging discrimination. She also sought information on levels of loading imposed due to weight only and how the company defined “overweight” for various heights, weights and gender.
In relation to the claim of discrimination, Eagle Star said Ms Treanor had alleged discrimination on grounds of disability when it was not aware Ms Treanor had any “disability” as defined by the Acts. On the allegation of victimisation, Eagle Star said Ms Treanor had failed to show how the sending of the letter to Ms Treanor’s GP could have impacted on her rights under the Acts.
The hearing continues today.
