Smith v Bunnings Group Limited [2023] FCA 516

Smith v Bunnings Group Limited [2023] FCA 516

The applicant failed to adduce evidence of disability and was not refused access to premises or goods and services; claims of direct and indirect discrimination were not reasonably arguable and the application lacked any evidential basis; leave to commence proceedings was refused.

Parties
Applicant: Kristen Smith; Respondent: Bunnings Group Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 May 2023
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Commence Proceeding Under the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (cth) / Leave Application Following AHRC Complaint Termination
Outcome
Application dismissed; leave refused; applicant ordered to pay respondent's costs.
Legal Topics
Disability Discrimination, Practice and Procedure, COVID 19 Face Mask Policies
Human Rights Law Administrative Law Disability Discrimination Practice and Procedure COVID 19 Face Mask Policies

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 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kristen Smith

Applicant

Bunnings Group Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Commence Proceeding Under the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (cth) / Leave Application Following AHRC Complaint Termination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether respondent engaged in direct or indirect discrimination under the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth)
  2. 2 Whether respondent engaged in unlawful discrimination by requiring customers to wear face masks or produce medical exemption
  3. 3 Whether leave should be granted to commence proceedings otherwise barred by operation of s 46PO(3A) of the Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (Cth)

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to adduce evidence of disability and was not refused access to premises or goods and services; claims of direct and indirect discrimination were not reasonably arguable and the application lacked any evidential basis; leave to commence proceedings was refused.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; leave refused; applicant ordered to pay respondent's costs.

Orders

  • The originating application dated 11 November 2022 be dismissed.
  • The applicant pay the respondent's costs to be assessed if not agreed.