Legal challenge sees Bunsen Burger chain insist it is not 'fast food'

An application for a work permit for chef was refused on the basis that the business runs fast-food outlets, which the company disputes.

The Bunsen Burger sign in Dawson St, Dublin.

The Bunsen Burger chain has been granted permission by the High Court to challenge what it calls a "misclassification" of its business as "fast food", which led to it being refused an application for a visa permit for a non-national chef de partie.

The challenge has been taken by Ducalla Limited, trading as Bunsen, which has outlets in Dublin, Cork, and Belfast, against the minister for enterprise, trade and employment.

Ducalla had submitted a general employment visa permit application for a non-national chef de partie candidate. The application included a HSE acknowledgement of registration under the European Communities (Hygiene and Foodstuffs) Regulations which described the food business as a "restaurant", not as fast food.

The company claims that the section of the regulations applied by the department in denying the permit was for a fast food outlet, which it was not.

Ducalla submits that Bunsen is a "full-service" restaurant with more than 75% of its customers receiving table service, where orders are taken, meals and drinks are served, and payments are completed at the table.

The company is seeking to quash the review decision of the department of last June which upheld an earlier refusal decision, Anthony Hanrahan SC and Keivon Sotoodeh BL, for Ducalla, submitted to the High Court today, adding that the review decision "is unreasonable and irrational in light of the information and documentation" put before the department.

"In order to fall within the definition of fast-food outlet, the food served in the restaurant must be either 'pre-cooked' or 'quickly prepared', or both, to fall within the definition," it is submitted.

"The respondent does not make a finding that the food is pre-cooked, and refers to the fact that the food is cooked to order," he submits.

"The respondent does not dispute the evidence of daily in-house preparation time of four to six hours for the raw beef and 15-25 minutes to prepare the meal from time of ordering. No reference is made in the decision to the food." 

Mr Hanrahan told Ms Justice Sara Phelan that if the department's decision could be interpreted as a finding that if the serving of burgers and chips "in itself" means that a restaurant is a fast-food outlet, then it was both "unreasonable and irrational".

Counsel submitted that the department acted in breach of fair procedures, and in breach of natural and constitutional justice in the manner the review decision was made by failing to adequately engage with the applicant over the chef role.

It is further claimed that the department failed to give adequate reasons why it applied Section 4 of the Employment Permits Regulations 2024 in failing to establish how Bunsen came to be defined as a fast-food outlet, therefore prohibiting the granting of the permit.

“Bunsen is a fast casual burger dining restaurant, and not a fast-food outlet, serving beer and wine," they submit.

Mr Justice Phelan granted leave for the judicial review challenge and adjourned the matter to January.