Andrews v Australian Rail Tram & Bus Industry Union (NSW Branch) [2020] NSWCATAD 321

Andrews v Australian Rail Tram & Bus Industry Union (NSW Branch) [2020] NSWCATAD 321

The application was dismissed because the applicant failed to establish that the respondent denied or limited any relevant benefit or service, failed to prove less favourable treatment causally connected to race, sex or disability, and failed to establish any aiding and abetting. The Tribunal accepted that the respondent provided extensive support, that Ms Bennett independently decided not to refer the dispute to the Fair Work Commission because the outcome achieved was a good result, and that the decision was unrelated to the applicant's protected attributes.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 December 2020
Procedural Posture
Anti Discrimination Complaint Referred by the President of the Anti Discrimination Board / Principal Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Application dismissed; respondent's name amended; matter to be listed for directions on the respondent's costs application.
Legal Topics
['race Discrimination' 'sex Discrimination' 'disability Discrimination' 'provision of Goods and Services' 'benefits of Industrial Organisation Membership' 'direct Discrimination' 'indirect Discrimination' 'aiding and Abetting']
['human Rights' 'anti Discrimination' 'industrial Organisations'] ['race Discrimination' 'sex Discrimination' 'disability Discrimination' 'provision of Goods and Services' 'benefits of Industrial Organisation Membership' 'direct Discrimination' 'indirect Discrimination' 'aiding and Abetting']

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

Anti Discrimination Complaint Referred by the President of the Anti Discrimination Board / Principal Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the respondent denied or limited the applicant's access to a benefit or service by not referring her workplace dispute to the Fair Work Commission or to external lawyers." 'Whether any denial or limitation of support amounted to race, sex or disability discrimination under the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW).' 'Whether the applicant established less favourable treatment by reference to an actual or hypothetical comparator.' 'Whether Ms Bennett caused, instructed, induced, aided or permitted unlawful discrimination by New South Wales Trains.']

Ratio Decidendi

The application was dismissed because the applicant failed to establish that the respondent denied or limited any relevant benefit or service, failed to prove less favourable treatment causally connected to race, sex or disability, and failed to establish any aiding and abetting. The Tribunal accepted that the respondent provided extensive support, that Ms Bennett independently decided not to refer the dispute to the Fair Work Commission because the outcome achieved was a good result, and that the decision was unrelated to the applicant's protected attributes.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; respondent's name amended; matter to be listed for directions on the respondent's costs application.

Orders

  • ['The name of the Respondent is amended to "Australian Rail Tram & Bus Industry Union (NSW Branch)"' 'The application is dismissed.' 'The registry will list the matter for further directions to determine the respondents application for costs.']