Moore v TAB Limited [2004] NSWADT 163

Moore v TAB Limited [2004] NSWADT 163

The imposition by the Respondent of a minimum age of 18 for the employment of persons during agency business hours is reasonable and appropriate in the context of responsible gambling policies, associated legislation, and the nature of work performed in betting agencies. The burden of this restriction is not disproportionate to its objectives of promoting responsible gambling, public policy, and legislative consistency. Thus, no unlawful age discrimination occurred under the Act as the defence in s49ZYG(2) is made out.

Parties
Applicant: Cameron Moore; Respondent: TAB Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 August 2004
Procedural Posture
Complaint Age Discrimination / Principal Matter Decision
Outcome
Complaint dismissed
Legal Topics
Age Discrimination in Employment, Minimum Working Age, Reasonable and Appropriate Restriction, Responsible Gambling Regulation
Anti Discrimination Employment Law Age Discrimination in Employment Minimum Working Age Reasonable and Appropriate Restriction Responsible Gambling Regulation

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 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cameron Moore

Applicant

TAB Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Complaint Age Discrimination / Principal Matter Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether refusal to authorise under-18 employment constitutes unlawful age discrimination under s49ZYG(1) Anti-Discrimination Act 1977.
  2. 2 Whether the minimum age requirement imposed was 'reasonable and appropriate' within the meaning of s49ZYG(2).

Ratio Decidendi

The imposition by the Respondent of a minimum age of 18 for the employment of persons during agency business hours is reasonable and appropriate in the context of responsible gambling policies, associated legislation, and the nature of work performed in betting agencies. The burden of this restriction is not disproportionate to its objectives of promoting responsible gambling, public policy, and legislative consistency. Thus, no unlawful age discrimination occurred under the Act as the defence in s49ZYG(2) is made out.

Court Disposition

Complaint dismissed

Orders

  • The complaint is dismissed.
  • No order as to costs.