van Royden v University of Sydney [2022] NSWCATAD 244

van Royden v University of Sydney [2022] NSWCATAD 244

Leave was refused because the complaint was lacking in substance. The Tribunal accepted that the University’s use of a central Inclusion and Disability Service and a standard registration process, including an acknowledgement about collection, use and protection of personal information, was reasonable. Mr van Royden...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 July 2022
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Proceed With Disability Discrimination Complaint / Leave Under S 96(1) After the President Declined the Complaint as Lacking in Substance
Outcome
Leave for the complaint against the University of Sydney to proceed is refused.
Legal Topics
['disability Discrimination' 'educational Authority' 'academic Adjustments' 'use and Disclosure of Personal Information' 'leave to Proceed With Complaint']
['human Rights' 'anti Discrimination' 'administrative Law' 'education'] ['disability Discrimination' 'educational Authority' 'academic Adjustments' 'use and Disclosure of Personal Information' 'leave to Proceed With Complaint']

Source-derived case record

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 Leave to Proceed With Disability Discrimination Complaint / Leave Under S 96(1) After the President Declined the Complaint as Lacking in Substance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave was required for the complaint to proceed before the Tribunal.' 'Whether it was fair and just to grant leave for the complaint to proceed.' 'Whether the complaint had substance in alleging disability discrimination by the University in relation to academic adjustments and registration with Inclusion and Disability Services.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was refused because the complaint was lacking in substance. The Tribunal accepted that the University’s use of a central Inclusion and Disability Service and a standard registration process, including an acknowledgement about collection, use and protection of personal information, was reasonable. Mr van Royden provided no evidentiary or factual basis that he was treated less favourably than a student without his disability in the same circumstances, or that his disability was a basis for any treatment; all students seeking access to Inclusion and Disability Services were required to follow the same process.

Court Disposition

Leave for the complaint against the University of Sydney to proceed is refused.

Orders

  • ['Leave for the complaint against the University of Sydney to proceed is refused.']