Brisbane City Council v Le Roy

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:

Brisbane City Council v Le Roy [2023] QCATA 90

PARTIES:

BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL 

(Applicant)

v  

MIREE LE ROY  

(Respondent)

APPLICATION NO/S:

APL268-21

ORIGINATING APPLICATION NO/S:

ADL008-20

MATTER TYPE:

Appeals

DELIVERED ON:

20 July 2023

HEARING DATE:

On the papers

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Judicial Member Forrest SC

ORDERS:

1.       Leave to rely on the affidavit of Raisa Veronique Conchin filed 7 October 2021 is refused.

2.       Leave to appeal against the orders of Member Traves of 2 July 2021 is refused.

CATCHWORDS:

APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – PROCEDURE – FROM QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL – BY LEAVE OF TRIBUNAL – where the Applicant seeks to appeal a decision by a Tribunal Member in an anti-discrimination matter that the Respondent’s complaint be dealt with as a representative complaint – whether leave to appeal should be granted – where the Applicant sought to rely on an affidavit that had been filed following the decision at first instance on the basis that it was “credible and necessary to clarify a matter about which the learned Member was led into error” – whether leave to rely on the affidavit should be granted

PROCEDURE – PROCEEDINGS IN QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL – REPRESENTATIVE PARTY – GENERALLY – whether the matter should have been determined as appropriate to proceed as a representative complaint – whether there has been sufficient particularity of identification of the class of persons sought to be represented – whether formal membership of an organisation described as a “movement” is necessary for people who describe themselves as “members” or “affiliates” of that movement or organisation to constitute a suitably definable class

Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 (Qld), s 195

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld), s 142(3)(a)(ii), s 142(3)(b)

Clarke v Japan Machines (Australia) Pty. Ltd. [1984] 1 Qd R 404

House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499

Petrusevski v Bulldogs Rugby League Ltd [2003] FCA 61

Pickering v McArthur [2005] QCA 294

REASONS FOR DECISION

1. The Brisbane City Council (“the Council”) seeks leave to appeal and, if leave is granted, appeals against the orders of a Tribunal Member in an anti-discrimination matter made on an application to have a complaint dealt with as a representative complaint. At the same time, it seeks leave to rely on fresh evidence that was not before the Tribunal below in the determination of this application.

   FACTUAL BACKGROUND TO SUBSTANTIVE DISPUTE

2. The Respondent, Ms Le Roy, alleges direct discrimination by the Council on the basis of political belief or activity in the area of the supply of goods and services. She contends she is a 62-year-old female who has, at all material times, “identified herself as a member and affiliate of the Extinction Rebellion global movement.” She contends that movement is “a political movement” with “the purpose of encouraging governments to take action to prevent climate breakdown and the extinction of species.”

3. Ms Le Roy further contends that she is a member of a group “known as…