Hsu v BHB Australia Pty Ltd trading as Far West Consulting & anor [2007] NSWADT 125

Hsu v BHB Australia Pty Ltd trading as Far West Consulting & anor [2007] NSWADT 125

The Tribunal was not satisfied, given inconsistencies and lack of probative detail in the evidence, that Ms Hsu discharged the onus of proof to establish that sexual harassment or indirect discrimination occurred. Requirements for loyalty and training applied to all staff and did not amount to indirect or sex discrimination. The complaints were not substantiated and were dismissed.

Parties
Applicant: Chia-Wen (Priscilla) Hsu; First Respondent: BHB Australia Pty Ltd trading as Far West Consulting Engineers; Second Respondent: Barry Barakat
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 June 2007
Procedural Posture
Complaint Under Anti Discrimination Act / Final Decision After Hearing
Outcome
Complaints dismissed
Legal Topics
Sex Discrimination, Sexual Harassment, Indirect Discrimination, Workplace Law
Equal Opportunity Employment Law Sex Discrimination Sexual Harassment Indirect Discrimination Workplace Law

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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chia-Wen (Priscilla) Hsu

Applicant

BHB Australia Pty Ltd trading as Far West Consulting Engineers

First Respondent

Barry Barakat

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Complaint Under Anti Discrimination Act / Final Decision After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant was sexually harassed by her employer within the meaning of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977
  2. 2 Whether the applicant was subjected to indirect sex discrimination
  3. 3 Whether the employer imposed unreasonable conditions amounting to discrimination

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal was not satisfied, given inconsistencies and lack of probative detail in the evidence, that Ms Hsu discharged the onus of proof to establish that sexual harassment or indirect discrimination occurred. Requirements for loyalty and training applied to all staff and did not amount to indirect or sex discrimination. The complaints were not substantiated and were dismissed.

Court Disposition

Complaints dismissed

Orders

  • The Complaints are dismissed.
  • No Order as to Costs.