Commonwealth of Australia v Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission & Anor [1998] FCA 137

Commonwealth of Australia v Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission & Anor [1998] FCA 137

Because the Commission adopted substantially the same approach as in Muller to the definition of spouse in Determination No 10 of 1983, and that approach was attended by legal error, the Commission's decisions finding discriminatory practice and recommending compensation had to be set aside and the matter remitted...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 February 1998
Procedural Posture
Application for Judicial Review Under the Administrative Decisions (judicial Review) Act 1977 of a Decision of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission / Reasons for Judgment and Orders
Outcome
Application allowed; Commission decisions set aside and matter remitted, with no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
['discrimination on the Ground of Sexual Preference' 'construction of Definition of Spouse' 'district Allowance' 'remote Locality Leave Fares' 'judicial Review of Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Decision']
['human Rights' 'administrative Law' 'employment Law' 'public Service'] ['discrimination on the Ground of Sexual Preference' 'construction of Definition of Spouse' 'district Allowance' 'remote Locality Leave Fares' 'judicial Review of Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Decision']

Source-derived case record

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

Application for Judicial Review Under the Administrative Decisions (judicial Review) Act 1977 of a Decision of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission / Reasons for Judgment and Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission's decision concerning the interpretation of Determination No 10 of 1983 was affected by legal error." "Whether the Department of Social Security's and the Department of Industrial Relations' practice of interpreting Determination 10 of 1983 so that same sex partnerships would not be recognised for the relevant entitlements constituted discrimination on the ground of sexual preference." "Whether Mr Kelland's partner satisfied the definition of spouse for the purposes of District Allowance and Remote Locality Leave fares."]

Ratio Decidendi

Because the Commission adopted substantially the same approach as in Muller to the definition of spouse in Determination No 10 of 1983, and that approach was attended by legal error, the Commission's decisions finding discriminatory practice and recommending compensation had to be set aside and the matter remitted for further consideration according to law.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; Commission decisions set aside and matter remitted, with no order as to costs.

Orders

  • ["The decisions of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission of 13 August 1996 that the Department of Social Security's and the Department of Industrial Relation's practice of interpreting Determination 10 of 1983 so that same sex partnerships would not be recognised for the purposes of the entitlements in...