Higman & anor v Halekulani Bowling Club Limited [2006] NSWADT 235

Higman & anor v Halekulani Bowling Club Limited [2006] NSWADT 235

Although Ms Higman was treated less favourably than other patrons, including male and non-Maori patrons, when she alone was told to be quiet, the Tribunal was not satisfied on the balance of probabilities that her race or sex was one of the reasons for that treatment; a plausible alternative explanation was that, as the only New Zealand supporter, her voice was distinctive and perceived as louder. The Tribunal was also not persuaded that the Club's investigation or response to her complaint was less favourable treatment on the grounds of race or sex. Mr Ford suffered detriment through refusal of service, being asked to leave, suspension and disciplinary charges, but the Tribunal was not...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 August 2006
Procedural Posture
Race Discrimination, Sex Discrimination and Victimisation Complaints Under the Anti Discrimination Act 1977 in the Equal Opportunity Division / Principal Matter; Final Decision After Hearing
Outcome
Ms Higman's complaints of race and sex discrimination were dismissed; Mr Ford's complaint of victimisation was dismissed.
Legal Topics
['direct Race Discrimination' 'direct Sex Discrimination' 'victimisation' 'less Favourable Treatment' 'detriment' 'causation' 'responsible Service of Alcohol']
['anti Discrimination Law' 'equal Opportunity' 'registered Clubs'] ['direct Race Discrimination' 'direct Sex Discrimination' 'victimisation' 'less Favourable Treatment' 'detriment' 'causation' 'responsible Service of Alcohol']

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

Race Discrimination, Sex Discrimination and Victimisation Complaints Under the Anti Discrimination Act 1977 in the Equal Opportunity Division / Principal Matter; Final Decision After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Club treated Ms Higman less favourably on the ground of race or sex when a duty supervisor told her to be quiet during a televised football match.' "Whether the Club's response to Ms Higman's complaint about the supervisor's conduct constituted less favourable treatment on the grounds of race or sex." 'Whether Mr Ford was subjected to a detriment by being refused service of alcohol, asked to leave, suspended and charged with conduct unbecoming of a member.' "Whether any detriment suffered by Mr Ford was caused by his support for Ms Higman's discrimination complaint or other conduct protected by s 50 of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977."]

Ratio Decidendi

Although Ms Higman was treated less favourably than other patrons, including male and non-Maori patrons, when she alone was told to be quiet, the Tribunal was not satisfied on the balance of probabilities that her race or sex was one of the reasons for that treatment; a plausible alternative explanation was that, as the only New Zealand supporter, her voice was distinctive and perceived as louder. The Tribunal was also not persuaded that the Club's investigation or response to her complaint was less favourable treatment on the grounds of race or sex. Mr Ford suffered detriment through refusal of service, being asked to leave, suspension and disciplinary charges, but the Tribunal was not...

Court Disposition

Ms Higman's complaints of race and sex discrimination were dismissed; Mr Ford's complaint of victimisation was dismissed.

Orders

  • ["Ms Higman's complaints of race and sex discrimination are dismissed." "Mr Ford's complaint of victimisation is dismissed."]