Administrative Decisions Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Trad v Jones (No 4) [2012] NSWADT 265 Hearing dates: 12 December 2012 Decision date: 12 December 2012 Jurisdiction: Equal Opportunity Division Before: Magistrate N Hennessy, Deputy President M Bolt, Non-Judicial Member D Kelleghan, Non-Judicial Member Decision: Mr Alan Jones read the following apology on air between 8.00 and 8.30 am on any day during the week commencing 17 December 2012: "On 28 April 2005 on my breakfast program on Radio 2GB I broadcast comments about Lebanese males including Lebanese Muslims. The comments were made following a Channel Nine television current affairs show about the conduct of young Lebanese men in Hickson Road at the Rocks. The Administrative Decisions Tribunal has found that my comments incited serious contempt of Lebanese males including Lebanese Muslims. Those comments were in breach of the NSW Anti-Discrimination Act. I apologise for making those comments which I recognise were unlawful. I also apologise on behalf of Radio 2 GB." Catchwords: ANTI-DISCRIMINATION - racial vilification - nature and timing of apology Legislation Cited: Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 Cases Cited: Sunol v Collier [2006] NSWADTAP 51 Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: Keysar Trad (Applicant) Alan Jones (1st Respondent) Harbour Radio Pty Ltd (2nd Respondent) Representation: Counsel T Blackburn SC (Respondents) Turner Freeman Lawyers (Applicant) Baker and McKenzie (1st and 2nd Respondents) File Number(s): 071036 REASONS FOR DECISION EX TEMPORE REASONS 1On 21 December 2009, the Administrative Decisions Tribunal ordered that: The parties are directed to confer about the time, form, extent and manner of publication of the apology to be issued in accordance with these reasons. If the Tribunal is not notified within 8 weeks of the date of these orders that agreement has been reached, directions will be issued under s 108(2)(d) of the AD Act 1977 about the details of the apology. 2The parties have been unable to come to an agreement and have been directed by the Tribunal to file and serve submissions about the time, form, extent and manner that the apology should take. 3Those are the only outstanding issues in these proceedings. 4We have rejected the respondents' submission that an apology that was made by Mr Jones on air on 6 December 2012 is an adequate acknowledgement of wrongdoing: Sunol v Collier [2006] NSWADTAP 51 at [54]. In any event, that apology was made unilaterally without the agreement of the applicant. It was not made in accordance with the Tribunal's order set out above. 5We have rejected the applicant's submission that the respondents should apologise to Mr Trad personally. We accept the respondents' submission that he was not vilified personally by the broadcast in Schedule A. 6We have also accepted evidence from the bar table from the respondents' lawyer that neither respondent has control of the website www.2GB.com at "The Alan Jones Breakfast Show". Accordingly we make no order that an apology be posted on that website. 7We make the following direction under s 108(2)(d) of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977: Mr Alan Jones read the following apology on air between 8.00 and 8.30 am on any day during the week commencing 17 December 2012: On 28 April 2005 on my breakfast program on Radio 2GB I broadcast comments about Lebanese males including Lebanese Muslims. The comments were made following a Channel Nine television current affairs show about the conduct of young Lebanese men in Hickson Road at the Rocks. The Administrative Decisions Tribunal has found that my comments incited serious contempt of Lebanese males including Lebanese Muslims. Those comments were in breach of the NSW Anti-Discrimination Act. I apologise for making those comments which I recognise were unlawful. I also apologise on behalf of Radio 2 GB." DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated. Decision last updated: 13 December 2012