While reading DB3K's post, I noticed this news story. How can someone get an indefinite ban as a result of a dispersal order. There's no conviction to base it on. It's interesting that there's a football ombudsman, I didn't know that. https://www.examiner.co.uk/news/ombudsman-calls-huddersfield-town-lift-14478685
True.... But it can't discriminate either. We have seen in recent years quite a few BandB owners being successfully prosecuted for turning away homosexual couples. If a club decides they do not want an individual to enter it's stadium therefore it has to have just reason. If it decrees that a supporter is to be banned then they must have evidence proving said individual is causing problems when in attendance. However i can't see anyone who is/has been behaving like a **** challenging a club's decision if there is supportive evidence. No business though can indiscriminately discriminate: this is unlawful.
Discrimination only applies if they were discriminated against based upon a protected characteristic, eg race or sexuality. The club can decline entry for any reason they like other than those.
Sexuality is a protected characteristic under the Equalities Act 2010; being an arse at a football match isn’t. Football club can do as it likes.
No it can't. A football club is a business and has to adhere to laws like any other. If it fails to do so then it is open to prosecution. My fundamental point is that a club cannot dictate who comes in and who doesn't as this would be discriminatory and to be fair i can't see this happening without good and lawful reason.
So as a perfectly reasonable and long-standing well-behaved supporter i could be denied access to the ground? Why? Unless it was full then i'd be asking for a legitimate explanation. If none was forthcoming then i would be seeking legal advice. Same if it was Asda etc.
A business can lawfully refuse entry or service only if: The business is full to capacity. Late entry/closing time Individuals are exhibiting anti-social behaviours.
This is not how the law works. You’d be welcome to seek legal advice. They’d ask you if you were discriminated against due to any protected characteristics (age, race, gender, etc), and if you weren’t then they’d tell you hard luck. Simple fact is that it’s very unlikely that a well behaved supporter such as yourself would ever be denied entry because that would be a crap way to run a business. Ultimately though, it would be that business’ choice, and they are fully entitled to do so. You do not have a right to watch the football- they do not have to let you in. It would be absurd if they did to be frank.
As above, the club is private property, they can remove your implied right of access at any time, no different from you saying who can and cannot go into your home. Discrimination is only applicable in regard to the aforementioned protected characteristics, there is no broader anti-discrimination legislation. Otherwise I'd sue Tesco for not giving me staff discount, despite the fact that I don't work there.
The tesco reference is not remotely applicable to this thread. The club is private property but what makes it legally liable is the fact that it provides "public accommodation". Irrespective of your above arguments a business, if challenged, would have to justify denying someone entry, even outside of the standard legislative remit.
The IFO is non-binding. "Public Accommodation" is a concept in US law, and is irrelevant. This is the legislation which covers discrimination in England. https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/c...ods-and-services-what-s-the-unfair-treatment/
So pubs can’t stop big groups of blokes going in? Guess I’m gonna get compo from most establishments in York. Big groups of women though, appear to be ok?
Yes if it's a written policy of that pub. They must therefore refuse all large male groups for it to be applicable. A football club however has no policy for refusing large groups of males...
As long as they don’t discriminate against individual(s) they can make justified calls and assumptions with the view of the greater good.
Wrong. It isn't discrimination to say they don't want you if you aren't discriminated against due to a protected characteristic. Supermarkets for example regularly ban people because they 'don't like the way that you shop' It's a polite way of saying 'we think you're nicking stuff but can't prove it', it happens every single day and is perfectly legal. We refused to serve a customer today because they were being an arse. They didn't break any law but we still refused them access because we didn't WANT their custom and we certainly didn't break a law in doing so
Wrong. You have just acknowledged that you refuse to serve, or indeed let in people who are/have been exhibiting anti-social behaviours or you suspect are thieving/or have stolen before. These are justifiable grounds for refusal. The argument is about un-justifiable refusal.
You are welcome to find the relevant law if you'd like which prevents me from saying for example that havana red1 you are now banned from my company.
"IFO recommendations are non-binding, but the Football Authorities have stated that they and their member clubs would normally expect to implement IFO findings."