Bell v iiNET Ltd

In Bell v iiNET Ltd, the plaintiff sought a declaration from the Federal Court that iiNET's internet terms were discriminatory, thus contravening the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth). The plaintiff, who uses a voice recognition system to access the internet, argued that the terms requiring a user to have certain physical capabilities constituted direct and indirect discrimination against people with disabilities. The case centred on whether iiNET's internet terms amounted to direct or indirect discrimination against individuals with disabilities under the Act.

The court considered whether the terms imposed by iiNET constituted direct discrimination, as defined by the Act. The court found that the terms did not specifically target individuals with disabilities but were generally applicable. The court also examined whether the terms constituted indirect discrimination, determining that they did not disadvantage people with disabilities disproportionately compared to others. The court held that the terms did not constitute discrimination as they were not imposed and were reasonable.

The court dismissed the plaintiff's application, concluding that iiNET's internet terms did not contravene the Disability Discrimination Act. The court found that the terms did not constitute direct or indirect discrimination against people with disabilities and were reasonable. Each party bore its own costs.