Galiatsatos v Earlwood-Bardwell Park RSL Club and anor [2009] NSWADT 52

Galiatsatos v Earlwood-Bardwell Park RSL Club and anor [2009] NSWADT 52

There was no unlawful discrimination by Mr Frost or the Club because Mr Frost was not obliged to provide alternative duties, only to consider adjustments to the inherent requirements of the position, and the Club's actions in banning the applicant were not shown to be because of her disability. Without a finding of unlawful discrimination, there could be no aiding and abetting under s 52.

Parties
Applicant: Debbie Galiatsatos; 1st Respondent: Earlwood-Bardwell Park RSL Club; 2nd Respondent: Patrick Frost
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 March 2009
Procedural Posture
Complaint Under Anti Discrimination Act / Final Decision
Outcome
Complaints dismissed
Legal Topics
Disability Discrimination in Employment, Disability Discrimination in Provision of Services, Aiding and Abetting Discrimination
Anti Discrimination Law Employment Law Disability Discrimination in Employment Disability Discrimination in Provision of Services Aiding and Abetting Discrimination

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Debbie Galiatsatos

Applicant

Earlwood-Bardwell Park RSL Club

1st Respondent

Patrick Frost

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Complaint Under Anti Discrimination Act / Final Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant was unlawfully discriminated against by Mr Frost in employment on the ground of disability
  2. 2 Whether the applicant was unlawfully discriminated against by the Club in the provision of services on the ground of disability
  3. 3 Whether the respondents aided and abetted each other in unlawful discrimination

Ratio Decidendi

There was no unlawful discrimination by Mr Frost or the Club because Mr Frost was not obliged to provide alternative duties, only to consider adjustments to the inherent requirements of the position, and the Club's actions in banning the applicant were not shown to be because of her disability. Without a finding of unlawful discrimination, there could be no aiding and abetting under s 52.

Court Disposition

Complaints dismissed

Orders

  • The complaints are dismissed.