Rohner, Felix Walter & Anor v Scanlan, Linda & Anor [1998] FCA 1006
The court held that the Migration Regulations' definition of 'spouse' as restricted to opposite sex partners did not amount to discrimination on the ground of sex under s 5(1) of the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth), because it applied equally to all applicants regardless of their sex. Any less favourable treatment arose on the basis of the nature of the relationship (same sex), not the sex of the applicant.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 24 August 1998
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Decision on Appeal From a Judge of the Federal Court of Australia
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- ['meaning of Spouse Under Migration Regulations' 'sexual Orientation and Discrimination' 'validity of Regulation Under Sex Discrimination Act']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Decision on Appeal From a Judge of the Federal Court of Australia
Legal Issues
- 1 ["Whether the definition of 'spouse' in the Migration Regulations, limited to opposite sex partners, contravenes the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth)" "Whether denial of a visa on the basis that a same sex partner is not a 'spouse' is discrimination on the ground of sex under the Act"]
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the Migration Regulations' definition of 'spouse' as restricted to opposite sex partners did not amount to discrimination on the ground of sex under s 5(1) of the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth), because it applied equally to all applicants regardless of their sex. Any less favourable treatment arose on the basis of the nature of the relationship (same sex), not the sex of the applicant.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- ['The Appeal be dismissed.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment