Burns v Sunol (No 2) [2016] NSWCATAD 97

Burns v Sunol (No 2) [2016] NSWCATAD 97

Although the Tribunal had power under s 108(2)(d) of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW) to order an apology after the homosexual vilification complaint was found substantiated, it was not appropriate to exercise that power because Mr Burns did not explain why an apology was appropriate in the circumstances, provided no material justifying publication in the Newcastle Herald or evidence of its cost, and an order already existed enjoining Mr Sunol from continuing to publish material of the relevant kind. The Tribunal therefore declined to take further action under s 108(2)(g).

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 May 2016
Procedural Posture
Equal Opportunity Complaint Alleging Homosexual Vilification Under the Anti Discrimination Act 1977 (nsw) / Decision on the Papers as to Orders After Complaint Found Substantiated
Outcome
The Tribunal declined to take any further action in the matter.
Legal Topics
['homosexual Vilification' 'orders After Substantiated Complaint' 'public Apology' 'decision on the Papers']
['equal Opportunity' 'anti Discrimination Law' 'administrative Law'] ['homosexual Vilification' 'orders After Substantiated Complaint' 'public Apology' 'decision on the Papers']

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
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Equal Opportunity Complaint Alleging Homosexual Vilification Under the Anti Discrimination Act 1977 (nsw) / Decision on the Papers as to Orders After Complaint Found Substantiated

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Tribunal should determine the issue of orders on the papers without holding a hearing.' 'Whether the Tribunal had power under s 108(2)(d) of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW) to order the respondent to publish an apology or give a written apology.' 'Whether proof of personal damage, loss or harm was a pre-condition to ordering an apology.' 'Whether, in the circumstances, it was appropriate to order the respondent to issue or publish an apology.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the Tribunal had power under s 108(2)(d) of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW) to order an apology after the homosexual vilification complaint was found substantiated, it was not appropriate to exercise that power because Mr Burns did not explain why an apology was appropriate in the circumstances, provided no material justifying publication in the Newcastle Herald or evidence of its cost, and an order already existed enjoining Mr Sunol from continuing to publish material of the relevant kind. The Tribunal therefore declined to take further action under s 108(2)(g).

Court Disposition

The Tribunal declined to take any further action in the matter.

Orders

  • ['Pursuant to s 108(2)(g) of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW), the Tribunal declines to take any further action in the matter.']