Beagan v Bi-Lo Pty Limited t/as BI-LO Killarney Vale [2011] NSWADT 301

Beagan v Bi-Lo Pty Limited t/as BI-LO Killarney Vale [2011] NSWADT 301

The Applicant did not provide evidence to support that the real reason for adverse treatment by the Respondent was her age or disability, nor evidence of less favourable treatment compared to others not sharing her attributes. The Applicant's case was found to be founded on a wrong idea as to the facts and therefore misconceived within the meaning of the dismissal provisions.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 November 2011
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Application for Summary Dismissal
Outcome
Application dismissed as misconceived
Legal Topics
['discrimination on Basis of Disability' 'discrimination on Basis of Age' 'provision of Goods and Services' 'summary Dismissal' 'misconceived Proceedings']
['equal Opportunity' 'anti Discrimination Law'] ['discrimination on Basis of Disability' 'discrimination on Basis of Age' 'provision of Goods and Services' 'summary Dismissal' 'misconceived Proceedings']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Application for Summary Dismissal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Applicant was discriminated against on the grounds of age or disability in the provision of goods and services' 'Whether the proceedings are misconceived or lacking in substance under the ADA and ADT Act']

Ratio Decidendi

The Applicant did not provide evidence to support that the real reason for adverse treatment by the Respondent was her age or disability, nor evidence of less favourable treatment compared to others not sharing her attributes. The Applicant's case was found to be founded on a wrong idea as to the facts and therefore misconceived within the meaning of the dismissal provisions.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed as misconceived

Orders

  • ["The Tribunal dismissed the Applicant's case pursuant to section 92 (1) (a) and section 102 of the ADA as it is misconceived."]