A couple has been awarded €2,000 by the Equality Tribunal for discrimination on family status grounds.
They were found to have been discriminated against in the provision of accommodation because they had two children.
Mr de Burca and his partner, Ms Fernandez, sought an apartment through Home Locaters.
On the day the viewing was to take place, a message was left on their phone that the landlord's wife has qualms about having children in the property.
In its defence, Home Locaters said that it had been operating in the Dublin property market for 20 years, and 20 per cent of its properties were let to families with children.
The apartment in question had previously had a couple and a baby, but the second bedroom was only a single and was felt to be unsuitable for two.
The equality officer found that the letting agency had failed to provide a reasonable answer as to why the explanation concerning the children was given to the complainants, and found that they had suffered discrimination because of their family status.
The Equality Tribunal also found in favour of Ms Maria O'Shea, who is aged over 60, who was refused service in a shop supplying hairdressing products on the grounds that she was too old.
She suffered discrimination on the grounds of her age, it found.
Ms Mary O'Brien, a member of the Traveller community, was awarded €1,000 for discrimination following a refusal of service in a licensed premises. A group of Travellers with her were awarded €700.
The pub refused them service because it had received a phone call from a retired member of the Garda Síochána saying that there had been trouble in a pub nearby, and they needed to be vigilant.
The group denied service had not been associated with the trouble.
However, eight other claims of discrimination from members of the Traveller community against licensed premises failed. One group, Mr Thomas Lawrence, another Mr Thomas Lawrence and Mr Michael Lawrence, brought such complaints against three pubs in Ballina, Co Mayo.
When the case came up for hearing, they failed to turn up and said later that due to a family illness they had to go to England.
The equality officer not only dismissed their claim, but held that by their actions they had impeded her investigation, and could be asked to pay the expenses of the respondents.
However, because the section of the Act allowing this had only taken effect a matter of days earlier, she said it would be inappropriate to impose an award of expenses against them on this occasion.