Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia Kingsbury v Melbourne City Mission [2024] FCA 1390 File number:
Judgment of: WHEELAHAN J
Date of judgment: 3 December 2024
Catchwords: HUMAN RIGHTS — application for leave to commence proceeding otherwise precluded by operation of s 46PO(3A) of the Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (Cth) (AHRC Act) – where the applicant had lodged a complaint with the Australian Human Rights Commission concerning claimed discrimination against him on the basis of his age in connection with the provision of social housing – where the applicant's complaint to the Australian Human Rights Commission was terminated by a delegate of the President pursuant to ss 46PF(1)(b) and 46PH(1B) of the AHRC Act on the ground that it was lacking in substance – James v WorkPower Inc [2018] FCA 2083, followed – held: there is insufficient evidence to suggest that the applicant has a tenable claim of unlawful age-based discrimination – application for leave to bring a proceeding dismissed.
Age Discrimination Act 2004 (Cth) ss 14, 15, 33, 33(b) Legislation: Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (Cth) ss 46PF(1)(b), 46PH(1B), 46PO, 46PO(3A) Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) Housing Act 1983 (Vic)
Cases cited: James v WorkPower Inc [2018] FCA 2083
Division: General Division
Registry: Victoria
National Practice Area:
Number of paragraphs: 31
Date of hearing: 3 December 2024
Counsel for the Applicant: The applicant appeared in person
Counsel for the First Respondent: Mr M Garozzo
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