INTRODUCTION
Through a thorough look into the case, it is clear that there are unresolved issues and legal loopholes in regard to legislation and acts in regard to discrimination in its broad nature. The Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 (Qld) is an Act to “promote equality of opportunity for everyone by protecting them from unfair discrimination in certain areas of activity and from sexual harassment and certain associated objectionable conduct.” However, there is a clear abundance of depth within the act itself, leading to the creation of cases as this, allowing this case note to explore the facts and judgements of the case itself whilst also providing an opinion on the topic of concern.
FACTS
Justices Fraser, Gotterson and Wilson of the Court …show more content…
Section 8 does not extend the reach of the Act in the way for which GK contended.”
The issue of the interaction of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 and the Liquor Act 1992 was not considered in the appeal. The tribunal at first instance and the Appeal Tribunal had different views about this aspect. As it was not pursued in the appeal the issue is unresolved.
The tribunal at first instance held there was an inconsistency between section 152 of the Liquor Act, which prohibits a business being conducted on licensed premises, other than a business authorised by the licence, and sections 82 & 83 of the Anti-Discrimination Act (which prohibits discrimination in the accommodation and pre-accommodation areas). Accordingly the Liquor Act, being the later Act, impliedly repealed the Anti-Discrimination Act to the extent of the inconsistency. In arriving at this finding, the tribunal relied on the decision in Attrill v State of Queensland, which has since been overturned by the Appeal Tribunal and the Court of …show more content…
Non-publication orders and Anonymity in the tribunal, orders for the use of initials only to identify GK were made to protect the privacy of GK. The orders were made under the QCAT Act rather than under section 191 of the Anti-Discrimination Act.
It is clear from the decision that orders of this nature made by the tribunal do not apply to the appeal proceedings in the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal has inherent power to make orders to the same effect, but an application needs to be made to the Court.
Through a thorough look into the case, it is clear that there are unresolved issues and legal loopholes in regard to legislation and acts in regard to discrimination in its broad nature. The Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 (Qld) is an Act to “promote equality of opportunity for everyone by protecting them from unfair discrimination in certain areas of activity and from sexual harassment and certain associated objectionable conduct.” However, there is a clear abundance of depth within the act itself, leading to the creation of cases as this, allowing this case note to explore the facts and judgements of the case itself whilst also providing an opinion on the topic of concern.
FACTS
Justices Fraser, Gotterson and Wilson of the Court …show more content…
Section 8 does not extend the reach of the Act in the way for which GK contended.”
The issue of the interaction of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 and the Liquor Act 1992 was not considered in the appeal. The tribunal at first instance and the Appeal Tribunal had different views about this aspect. As it was not pursued in the appeal the issue is unresolved.
The tribunal at first instance held there was an inconsistency between section 152 of the Liquor Act, which prohibits a business being conducted on licensed premises, other than a business authorised by the licence, and sections 82 & 83 of the Anti-Discrimination Act (which prohibits discrimination in the accommodation and pre-accommodation areas). Accordingly the Liquor Act, being the later Act, impliedly repealed the Anti-Discrimination Act to the extent of the inconsistency. In arriving at this finding, the tribunal relied on the decision in Attrill v State of Queensland, which has since been overturned by the Appeal Tribunal and the Court of …show more content…
Non-publication orders and Anonymity in the tribunal, orders for the use of initials only to identify GK were made to protect the privacy of GK. The orders were made under the QCAT Act rather than under section 191 of the Anti-Discrimination Act.
It is clear from the decision that orders of this nature made by the tribunal do not apply to the appeal proceedings in the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal has inherent power to make orders to the same effect, but an application needs to be made to the Court.