Christine Newman
Judgment has been reserved in what is regarded as a legal test case taken by the Equality Authority against Portmarnock Golf Club in Co Dublin for its policy of excluding women from membership.
Yesterday, in the Dublin District Court both parties made submissions before Judge Mary Collins.
The judge indicated she would give her judgment within a month. If there is a constitutional issue or a question on the meaning of a section of the Equal Status Act 2000, then the judge can refer it as a case stated to the High Court for interpretation.
Yesterday, the Equality Authority argued that the club's position on only allowing male members was discriminatory and in breach of the Act.
The only sanction that could be taken was for the club to lose its certificate of registration for 30 days which would prevent it from selling alcohol.
Portmarnock contended that the club was private and had the power of exclusion.
Mr Frank Callanan SC, for the Equality Authority, said the licence could be suspended for 30 days. If there was a subsequent ruling, the club could indefinitely be deprived of its licence.
He said women could play golf at the club but could not have membership meaning they were excluded from the committee, or any executive role.
He said there were restrictions on women's ability to play golf there; for example, the times they were permitted to play were on a grace-and-favour basis.
He said there was no constitutional issue. It was contended by Portmarnock they were private and had power of exclusion.
"But the privacy of Portmarnock is not interfered with by the Act, the power of exclusion is not set aside. They can still choose who to admit, it merely provides that the choice not be made on the grounds of gender," he said.
Mr Donal O'Donnell SC for Portmarnock Golf Club, said Portmarnock was a bone fide golf club. Membership was confined to men. In every other aspect, it did not make any distinction between men and women.
He claimed the Authority only raised the issue when it was announced the Irish Open was to be held there in 2003.
The Act did not prohibit the choice of whether to admit a person or not. It referred to discrimination against people who were already members. It was a distinction which was key to understanding the Act as it applied to single-gender golf clubs. Refusal of membership was the only thing a club could do.
It did not permit admission then allow distinction between members, for example, a club was not entitled to admit Travellers to membership and then say they would only have class B rights.
Mr O'Donnell contended that the certificate of registration did not confer the right to consume alcohol. The members already had that right. There was no such thing as a club's licence. It was the same in a private club as a person at home having a drink. The certificate of registration was only a regulatory provision to avoid abuse.