Burns v Radio 2UE Sydney Pty Ltd & Ors (No2) [2005] NSWADT 24

Burns v Radio 2UE Sydney Pty Ltd & Ors (No2) [2005] NSWADT 24

Orders should be made to remedy and prevent the effects of vilification, consistent with the purposes of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977. A public apology of a legal, not personal, nature is an appropriate and proportionate remedy. No program or policy is warranted in the absence of evidence of systemic conduct. Costs should be awarded due to the public interest nature of the complaint.

Parties
Applicant: Gary Burns; First Respondent: Radio 2UE Sydney Pty Ltd; Third Respondent: John Laws; Second Respondent: Steve Price
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 February 2005
Procedural Posture
Application for Remedies and Costs Following Finding of Vilification / Post Liability Decision; Determination of Remedies and Costs
Outcome
Complaint substantiated; orders made for publication and broadcast of apologies; costs awarded to applicant.
Legal Topics
Homosexual Vilification, Remedies for Vilification, Public Apology, Costs in Anti Discrimination Cases
Anti Discrimination Law Administrative Law Homosexual Vilification Remedies for Vilification Public Apology Costs in Anti Discrimination Cases

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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gary Burns

Applicant

Radio 2UE Sydney Pty Ltd

First Respondent

John Laws

Third Respondent

Steve Price

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Remedies and Costs Following Finding of Vilification / Post Liability Decision; Determination of Remedies and Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What remedial and preventative orders should be made following a finding of homosexual vilification under the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977?
  2. 2 Is an order for a public apology appropriate and in what terms?
  3. 3 Should a program or policy be ordered to address vilification?

Ratio Decidendi

Orders should be made to remedy and prevent the effects of vilification, consistent with the purposes of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977. A public apology of a legal, not personal, nature is an appropriate and proportionate remedy. No program or policy is warranted in the absence of evidence of systemic conduct. Costs should be awarded due to the public interest nature of the complaint.

Court Disposition

Complaint substantiated; orders made for publication and broadcast of apologies; costs awarded to applicant.

Orders

  • The first respondent will cause an apology to be published as directed, including on its website and in three major newspapers.
  • The first and second respondents will cause an apology to be read and broadcast by Mr Price at specified times on Radio 2UE.