Storey v Blacktown City Council [2021] NSWCATAD 70

Storey v Blacktown City Council [2021] NSWCATAD 70

Leave was refused because, taking the applicants' evidence at its highest, the complaint had no prospect of establishing unlawful disability discrimination under ss 49B and 49M of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977. The Council's investigation, assessment and possible abatement of nuisance were regulatory functions, and while ancillary services such as answering queries and providing information may exist, those services were not refused. The making of a regulatory order could not be construed as a service. The alleged discriminatory comment, delay, failure to follow guidelines, notice of inspections and other alleged differential treatment concerned the manner in which any service was...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Disability Discrimination Complaint in the Area of Goods and Services Under the Anti Discrimination Act 1977 (nsw) / Application for Leave to Proceed After the President's Delegate Declined the Complaints Under S 92(1)(a)(i) as Lacking in Substance and the Complaints Were Referred to the Tribunal Under S 93 a
Outcome
Leave to proceed with the complaint refused.
Legal Topics
['disability Discrimination' 'goods and Services' 'refusal of Service' 'terms of Service' 'council Regulatory Functions' 'leave to Proceed With Declined Complaint']
['human Rights' 'equal Opportunity' 'anti Discrimination' 'administrative Law'] ['disability Discrimination' 'goods and Services' 'refusal of Service' 'terms of Service' 'council Regulatory Functions' 'leave to Proceed With Declined Complaint']

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

Disability Discrimination Complaint in the Area of Goods and Services Under the Anti Discrimination Act 1977 (nsw) / Application for Leave to Proceed After the President's Delegate Declined the Complaints Under S 92(1)(a)(i) as Lacking in Substance and the Complaints Were Referred to the Tribunal Under S 93 a

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be granted under s 96(1) of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 for the declined complaints to proceed before the Tribunal.' 'Whether the alleged Council conduct involved provision of goods or services within s 49M of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977.' 'Whether the Council refused to provide services or discriminated in the terms on which services were provided on the ground of disability.' 'Whether alleged conduct after 18 February 2020 and alleged victimisation could be considered at the leave stage.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was refused because, taking the applicants' evidence at its highest, the complaint had no prospect of establishing unlawful disability discrimination under ss 49B and 49M of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977. The Council's investigation, assessment and possible abatement of nuisance were regulatory functions, and while ancillary services such as answering queries and providing information may exist, those services were not refused. The making of a regulatory order could not be construed as a service. The alleged discriminatory comment, delay, failure to follow guidelines, notice of inspections and other alleged differential treatment concerned the manner in which any service was...

Court Disposition

Leave to proceed with the complaint refused.

Orders

  • ['Leave to proceed with the complaint is refused under s 96(1) of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977.']