A School v Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission & Anor [1998] FCA 1437

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA DISCRIMINATION – review of decision of Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission – allegation of discrimination in provision of educational services contrary to s 22 of Disability Discrimination Act 1992 – consideration of meaning of direct discrimination – whether definition imposes positive duty in some circumstances – whether Commission misdirected itself in finding direct discrimination under s 5 – whether Commission erred in finding indirect discrimination under s 6 – whether Commission failed to deal with a complaint of harassment under s 37. EVIDENCE – course of evidence and addresses – documentary evidence – whether reception into evidence of contemporaneous note without opportunity to cross-examine – rule in Browne v Dunn. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – procedural fairness – whether parties given opportunity to address issue of causation of loss. Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review )Act 1977 Disability Discrimination Act 1992, ss 3, 4, 5, 6, 16(3), 17(2), 18(4), 19(2), 21(2), 22, 23(2), 24(2), 25(3), 27(3), 28(3), 37 45, 69, 76(1), 79(1), 83, 95, 98, 103, 105A Boehringer Ingelheim Pty Ltd v Reddrop [1984] 2 NSWLR 13, applied Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v Wu Shan Liang (1996) 185 CLR 259, applied Kioa v West (1985) 159 CLR 550, cited National Companies and Securities Commission v News Corporation Ltd (1984) 156 CLR 296, applied Twist v Randwick Municipal Council (1976) 136 CLR 106, applied O'Rourke v Miller (1984-1985) 156 CLR 342, considered Browne v Dunn (1893) 6 R. 67, considered Marelic v Comcare (1993) 47 FCR 437, followed White Industries (Qld) Pty Ltd v Flower & Hart (A Firm) (1998) 156 ALR 169, followed Minister for Immigration Local Government and Ethnic Affairs v Taveli (1990) 23 FCR 162, considered

A SCHOOL v HUMAN RIGHTS AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION and MRS J (on behalf of herself and AJ) SG 45 of 1998