DLH v Nationwide News Pty Ltd (No 2) [2018] NSWCATAD 217

DLH v Nationwide News Pty Ltd (No 2) [2018] NSWCATAD 217

While the article's pejorative language, focus on transgender status, and mocking tone were capable of causing offense and low-grade ridicule or contempt, the Tribunal was not persuaded that the article crossed the threshold required by s 38S to amount to unlawful acts capable of inciting 'serious contempt' or...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Applicant: DLH; Respondent: Nationwide News Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 September 2018
Procedural Posture
Complaint Under Anti Discrimination Act 1977 (nsw) / Final Determination and Orders
Outcome
complaint dismissed
Legal Topics
Transgender Vilification, Vilification by Public Act, Protected Characteristics, Media Reporting and Discrimination, Objective Test for Vilification
Anti Discrimination Administrative Law Media Law Transgender Vilification Vilification by Public Act Protected Characteristics Media Reporting and Discrimination Objective Test for Vilification

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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

DLH

Applicant

Nationwide News Pty Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Complaint Under Anti Discrimination Act 1977 (nsw) / Final Determination and Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the publication had the capacity to incite serious contempt for or severe ridicule of Ms Amati and/or transgender people on the ground of Ms Amati being a transgender person under s 38S of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW)
  2. 2 Whether, if so, the publication was nonetheless excluded from unlawfulness by exceptions in s 38S(2) of the Act

Ratio Decidendi

While the article's pejorative language, focus on transgender status, and mocking tone were capable of causing offense and low-grade ridicule or contempt, the Tribunal was not persuaded that the article crossed the threshold required by s 38S to amount to unlawful acts capable of inciting 'serious contempt' or 'severe ridicule' in the ordinary reader; accordingly, the complaint was dismissed.

Court Disposition

complaint dismissed

Orders

  • The complaint is dismissed.