Aldridge -v- Commissioner of Corrective Services [1999] NSWADT 33
On the balance of probabilities, the Respondent unlawfully discriminated against the Applicant on the ground of race. The Tribunal preferred the Applicant's evidence where it conflicted with the Respondent's evidence. It found that the Applicant was treated less favourably and segregated from persons of his own race by being removed from the Aboriginal Resources Unit, not offered a substantially similar grade 7/8 position in the Indigenous Services Unit, and prevented from working on Aboriginal issues. The Tribunal also found that ignoring his correspondence, abusing him in front of other staff, and removing him from the principal Aboriginal policy-making unit constituted detriments and...
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 25 May 1999
- Procedural Posture
- Equal Opportunity Application Alleging Disability Discrimination in Employment, Harassment, Race Discrimination in Employment and Victimisation / Principal Matter; Noted as Set Aside by Appeal on 18/4/00
- Outcome
- Application upheld on race discrimination grounds; orders made for damages, costs and restoration to a position, with the decision noted as set aside by appeal on 18/4/00.
- Legal Topics
- ['race Discrimination in Employment' 'disability Discrimination in Employment' 'victimisation' 'detriment in Employment' 'public Sector Employment' 'damages for Injury to Feelings']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Equal Opportunity Application Alleging Disability Discrimination in Employment, Harassment, Race Discrimination in Employment and Victimisation / Principal Matter; Noted as Set Aside by Appeal on 18/4/00
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the Respondent discriminated against the Applicant on the ground of race by treating him less favourably in employment.' 'Whether the Respondent segregated the Applicant from persons of his own race by removing him from the Aboriginal Resources Unit and not offering him a position in the Indigenous Services Unit.' "Whether the Respondent denied or limited the Applicant's access to benefits associated with employment or subjected him to detriment contrary to s 8(2) of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977." "Whether one reason for the Respondent's acts was unlawful discrimination so that s 4A of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 applied."]
Ratio Decidendi
On the balance of probabilities, the Respondent unlawfully discriminated against the Applicant on the ground of race. The Tribunal preferred the Applicant's evidence where it conflicted with the Respondent's evidence. It found that the Applicant was treated less favourably and segregated from persons of his own race by being removed from the Aboriginal Resources Unit, not offered a substantially similar grade 7/8 position in the Indigenous Services Unit, and prevented from working on Aboriginal issues. The Tribunal also found that ignoring his correspondence, abusing him in front of other staff, and removing him from the principal Aboriginal policy-making unit constituted detriments and...
Court Disposition
Application upheld on race discrimination grounds; orders made for damages, costs and restoration to a position, with the decision noted as set aside by appeal on 18/4/00.
Orders
- ['That the Respondent pay to the Applicant the sum of ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00) damages for injury to feelings, distress, mental anguish and suffering, stress and anxiety and loss of career prospects and development opportunities.' 'That each party pay their own costs.' 'That the Respondent restore the...
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