Fetherston v Peninsula Health [2004] FCA 485

The applicant's employment was not terminated because of his disability, but because he refused to allow an independent specialist to report to his employer regarding his visual capacity; such a requirement was reasonable in the circumstances. There was no unlawful discrimination under the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth) in the actions or termination by the respondent.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 23 April 2004
Procedural Posture: Application / Final Judgment After Hearing
Outcome: Application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics: ['disability Discrimination' 'dismissal' 'reasonable Adjustment' 'indirect Discrimination' 'employment Contracts']

['discrimination Law' 'employment Law'] ['disability Discrimination' 'dismissal' 'reasonable Adjustment' 'indirect Discrimination' 'employment Contracts']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Procedural Posture

Application / Final Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

1 ['Whether the applicant was discriminated against on the ground of disability under the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth)' 'Whether the requirement for independent assessment of visual disability was reasonable' "Whether termination was 'because of' the applicant's disability" 'Whether the treatment was less favourable than that accorded to a person without the disability in materially similar circumstances']

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs

Orders

['The application is dismissed' "The applicant pay the respondents' costs, including reserved costs"]