LD -v- Voltime Pty Ltd (trading as Cronulla Hotel) [2000] NSWADT 95

LD -v- Voltime Pty Ltd (trading as Cronulla Hotel) [2000] NSWADT 95

The application was dismissed because, although the Tribunal confined the referred complaint to direct discrimination under s 49ZG based on presumed homosexuality, the existing material, including evidence that the applicant was barred after complaints about conduct said to have homosexual connotations, was capable, if substantiated, of establishing the complaint. At the preliminary stage the Tribunal was not satisfied there was no reasonable likelihood that the applicant could establish his allegations.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 June 2000
Procedural Posture
Application for Dismissal of Discrimination Complaint Under S111(1) of the Anti Discrimination Act 1977 / Preliminary Application Before the Tribunal Had Formally Embarked on the Inquiry
Outcome
Application under s111(1) dismissed; inquiry to proceed limited to the complaint under s 49ZG of the Act; no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
['direct Discrimination' 'presumed Homosexuality' 'goods and Services' 'dismissal of Complaint as Frivolous, Vexatious, Misconceived or Lacking in Substance']
['anti Discrimination Law' 'administrative Tribunal Procedure'] ['direct Discrimination' 'presumed Homosexuality' 'goods and Services' 'dismissal of Complaint as Frivolous, Vexatious, Misconceived or Lacking in Substance']

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

Application for Dismissal of Discrimination Complaint Under S111(1) of the Anti Discrimination Act 1977 / Preliminary Application Before the Tribunal Had Formally Embarked on the Inquiry

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the complaint referred to the Tribunal should be dismissed under s 111(1) as misconceived, lacking substance, vexatious or frivolous.' 'Whether the complaint before the Tribunal was confined to direct discrimination under s 49ZG of the Act based on presumed homosexuality.' 'Whether the available or potential evidence had capacity to establish that the applicant was treated unfairly on the ground of presumed homosexuality in relation to goods and services.']

Ratio Decidendi

The application was dismissed because, although the Tribunal confined the referred complaint to direct discrimination under s 49ZG based on presumed homosexuality, the existing material, including evidence that the applicant was barred after complaints about conduct said to have homosexual connotations, was capable, if substantiated, of establishing the complaint. At the preliminary stage the Tribunal was not satisfied there was no reasonable likelihood that the applicant could establish his allegations.

Court Disposition

Application under s111(1) dismissed; inquiry to proceed limited to the complaint under s 49ZG of the Act; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • ['Application under s111(1) of Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 is dismissed.' 'No order as to costs.']