Denmeade v Kempsey Shire Council & Ors (No.2) [2003] NSWADT 225

CITATION: Denmeade v Kempsey Shire Council & Ors (No.2) [2003] NSWADT 225 DIVISION: Equal Opportunity Division APPLICANT Lindy Denmeade FIRST RESPONDENT Kempsey Shire Council SECOND RESPONDENT Keith Finnie THIRD RESPONDENT PARTIES: Andrew Evans FOURTH RESPONDENT Warren Howe FIFTH RESPONDENT Chris Gorman SIXTH RESPONDENT Kevin Shaw SEVENTH RESPONDENT Gary Grant FILE NUMBER: 991104, 021023 HEARING DATES: 11/11/2002-14/11/2002, 7/04/2003-8/04/2003 SUBMISSIONS CLOSED: 04/08/2003 DATE OF DECISION: 09/30/2003

BEFORE: Britton A - Judicial Member; Alt M - Member; McDonald O - Member APPLICATION: Sex Discrimination - In work - Sexual Harassment - In workplace - Victimisation MATTER FOR DECISION: Principal matter LEGISLATION CITED : Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 Wollongong City Council v Bonella & ors and Bonella & ors v Wollongong City Council (EOD) [2002] NSWADTAP 26 Commissioner of Police; New South Wales Police Service v Mooney (EOD) [2001] NSWADTAP 20 Battenberg v The Union Club [no.2] [2003] NSWADT 187 Hatic v Linfox Transport (Australia) Pty Ltd [2003] McAuliffe v Puplick & Anor. (1996) EOC 92-800 Langley v Niland [1981] 2 NSWLR at 107-108 CASES CITED: Bonella v Wollongong City Council [2001] NSWADT 194 Sivananthan v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Service [2001] NSWADT 44 Waters v Public Transport Commission (1992) 173 CLR 349 O'Callaghan v Loder [1984] EOC 92-023 Reddrop v Boeringer Ingleheim Pty Ltd [1984] EOC 92-031 Hall v Sheiban (1985) ALR 503 APPLICANT In person REPRESENTATION: FIRST-SIXTH RESPONDENTS K Nomchong, barrister SEVENTH RESPONDENT R Banks, solicitor ORDERS: 1 The complaints of discrimination on the ground of sex, sex harassment and victimisation made against the second to the seventh respondent (inclusive) are dismissed; 2 The complaint of aiding and abetting made against the seventh respondent is dismissed; 3 The complaint of victimisation against the first respondent in relation to Allegation 10 is upheld; the balance of the complaint/s of victimisation against the first respondent is dismissed; 4 The Applicant is awarded damages in the sum of $4000; 5 Parties granted leave to apply for costs. Application and submission for costs to be filed and served within 14 days of the date of these orders