Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Mastrangioli v Chisholm Institute of Technical and Further Education [2014] FCA 66 Citation: Mastrangioli v Chisholm Institute of Technical and Further Education [2014] FCA 66
Parties: JOHANNA MASTRANGIOLI v CHISHOLM INSTITUTE OF TECHNICAL AND FURTHER EDUCATION
File number(s): VID 534 of 2012
Judge(s): PAGONE J
Date of judgment: 13 February 2014
Catchwords: HUMAN RIGHTS – discrimination – whether student was discriminated against on the basis of her disability – whether the case proved on the balance of probabilities – whether evidence gives rise to "reasonable and definite" inferences.
Legislation: Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) s 140
Cases cited: Abram v Bank of New Zealand [1996] ATPR 41-507 Australian Broadcasting Corporation v Lenah Game & Meats Pty Ltd (2001) 2008 CLR 199 Hoe v Manningham City Council [2011] VSC 37 Neil v Nott (1994) 121 ALR 148 Luxton v Vines (1952) 85 CLR 352 McWhinney v Melbourne Health (2011) 31 VR 285 Minogue v Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (1999) 84 FCR 438 Platcher v Joseph [2004] FCAFC 68
Date of hearing: 28, 29, 30, 31 January and 1 February 2014
Date of last submissions: 1 February 2014
Place: Melbourne
Division: GENERAL DIVISION
Category: Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 43
Counsel for the Applicant: In person
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr M Felman
Solicitor for the Respondent: Lander & Rogers
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate