Johnstone -V- N S W Tafe Commission (Hunter Institute Of Technology) (No. 1) [1996] ADT

Legal Services Division

CITATION: Johnstone -V- N S W Tafe Commission (Hunter Institute Of Technology) (No. 1) [1996] ADT

COMPLAINANT: Amanda Johnstone

RESPONDENT: N S W TAFE Commission (Hunter Institute of Technology)

Ms Narelle Bell ( Judicial Member ) TRIBUNAL: Mr N Lacey Mr N Rogan

GROUNDS OF COMPLAINT: Discrimination on the ground of sex (pregnancy) in the area of education

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 11/26/1996

Complainant: Andrew Thorpe Solicitors (Solicitors) Ms F Davis (Counsel) LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: Respondent: State Crown Solicitor's Office (Solicitors) Mr M Dicker (Counsel)

The Tribunal has decided to grant the Respondent's application and our reasons are as follows.

The Respondent has made an application to the Tribunal to dismiss the Complainant's complaint under section 111 of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977. The Respondent submits that the complaint is misconceived or lacking in substance.

Section 111(1) provides: "where at any stage of an inquiry the Tribunal is satisfied that a complaint is frivolous, vexatious, misconceived or lacking in substance or that for any other reason the complaint should not be entertained it may dismiss the complaint."

The Tribunal has had regard to a number of decisions, some cited by counsel for the Complainant, some not. Those cited by counsel for the Complainant included Yarran & Anor v Westpac Banking Corporation 1992 EOC 92 440, Sam Barakas v CSIRO 1992 EOC 92 411, Duggan v Shore Inn 1992 EOC 92 457 and Hill v University of New England 1990 EOC 92 291.