Ryan v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force (No 4) [2023] FCA 1016

Federal Court of Australia

Ryan v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force (No 4) [2023] FCA 1016 File number(s): NSD 974 of 2018

Judgment of: ABRAHAM J

Date of judgment: 25 August 2023

Catchwords: HUMAN RIGHTS - Disability discrimination in employment – where Full Court ordered matter remitted for rehearing – nature of the remittal – whether revocation of status constituted direct discrimination – characteristics of appropriate hypothetical comparator – whether the applicant received less favourable treatment – whether the revocation constituted indirect discrimination – whether the condition required of the applicant is reasonable. HELD: Matter remitted pursuant to s 28(1)(c) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) – claims not established.

Legislation: Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth) ss 5, 6, 10, 15(2), 21A Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) s 55 Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) ss 28(1), 37M Industrial Relations Act 1996 (NSW) ss 210, 213 Police Act 1990 (NSW) s 87 Police (Regulation) Superannuation Act 1906 (NSW)

Cases cited: Abela v State of Victoria [2013] FCA 832 Addenbrooke Pty Ltd v Duncan (No 3) [2017] FCAFC 166 Australian Medical Council v Wilson [1996] FCA 591; (1996) 68 FCR 46 Bobolas v Economist Newspaper Ltd [1987] 1 WLR 1101 Catholic Education Office v Clarke [2004] FCAFC 197; (2004) 138 FCR 121 Commissioner of Taxation v Pratt Holdings Pty Ltd [2005] FCA 1247; (2005) 225 ALR 266 Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission [1997] FCA 1311; (1997) 80 FCR 78 Commonwealth of Australia v Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission [1995] FCA 1067; (1995) 63 FCR 74 CPSU, The Community and Public Sector Union v Telstra Corporation Ltd (No 2) [2001] FCA 479; (2001) 112 FCR 324 Fernando v Commonwealth of Australia [2014] FCAFC 181; (2014) 231 FCR 251 Fernando v Commonwealth of Australia (No 5) [2013] FCA 901 Forbes v Australian Federal Police (Commonwealth of Australia) [2004] FCAFC 95 Harvard Nominees Pty Ltd v Tiller (No 4) [2022] FCA 105; (2022) 403 ALR 498 Harvard Nominees Pty Ltd v Nicoletti [2022] FCAFC 179 Horton v Horton [1960] 1 WLR 987 Izzo v State of Victoria (Department of Education and Training) [2020] FCA 770 Lynch, A.R. v Howard, W.J. & Ors [1980] FCA 118; (1980) 44 FLR 71 McLoughlin v Randstad Pty Ltd [2023] FedCFamC2G 30 Microsoft Corporation v CPL Notting Hill Pty Ltd & Ors (No.5) [2019] FCCA 1255 Munday v Commonwealth of Australia (No 2) [2014] FCA 1123; (2014) 226 FCR 199 Nojin v Commonwealth of Australia [2011] FCA 1066; (2011) 283 ALR 800 Ponraj v Wycombe Services Pty Ltd [2023] FCA 118 Purvis v State of New South Wales (Department of Education and Training) [2003] HCA 62; (2003) 217 CLR 92 Roe v Naylor (1918) 87 LJKB 958 Ryan v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force (No 2) [2021] FCA 106 Ryan v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force [2022] FCAFC 36; (2022) 290 FCR 369 Sklavos v Australasian College of Dermatologists [2017] FCAFC 128; (2017) 256 FCR 247 Shamoon v Chief Constable of The Royal Ulster Constabulary [2003] UKHL 11 State of Victoria v Schou (No 2) [2004] VSCA 71; (2004) 8 VR 120 Walker v State of Victoria [2011] FCA 258; (2011) 279 ALR 284 Watts v Australian Postal Corporation [2014] FCA 370; (2014) 222 FCR 220 Waters v Public Transport Corporation [1991] HCA 49; (1991) 173 CLR 349 Zhang v University of Tasmania [2009] FCAFC 35; (2009) 174 FCR 366