Carr v Botany Bay Council

[2003] NSWADT 209

CITATION:	Carr v Botany Bay Council & Anor [2003] NSWADT 209
DIVISION:	Equal Opportunity Division
PARTIES:	APPLICANT Stephen Carr FIRST RESPONDENT City of Botany Bay Council SECOND RESPONDENT Michael Rowan
FILE NUMBER:	021127
HEARING DATES:	17/06/2003
SUBMISSIONS CLOSED:	06/23/2003
DATE OF DECISION:	09/09/2003
BEFORE:	Goode P - Judicial Member; Alt M - Member; Mooney L - Member
APPLICATION:	Disability Discrimination - In work
MATTER FOR DECISION:	Application under s111(1) of the Act
LEGISLATION CITED:	Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 Anti-Discrimination Act 1977
CASES CITED:	Tredinnick v Wentworth Area Health Service [2000] NSWADT 172, Bradley v State of New South Wales[2002] NSWADT 11, Crewdson v Niland [2002] NSWADTAP 5 Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Service v Orr [2001] NSWADTAP 16, IW v City of Perth (1997) 191 CLR 1, Cosma v Qantas Airways Ltd [2002] FCAFC 425, Commissioner of Police v The Estate of Edward John Russell & Ors [2002] NSWCA 272, Marsden v Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission [2000] FCA 1619, Tate v Rafin [2000] FCA 1582, Purvis v State of New South Wales (Department of Education and Training) [2002] FCAFC 503, Re Bolton; Ex parte Beane (1987) 162 CLR 514, Pyramid Building Society (in liquidation) v Terry (1996-1997) 189 CLR 176, Mills v Meeking (1990) 169 CLR 214, Khan v Commissioner, Department of Corrective Services & Anor (EOD) [2001] NSWADTAP 1, Lembecke v SAS Trustee Corporation [2003] NSWCA 136, Reyes-Gonzalez v Sydney Institute of Technology [1998] NSWEOT, Langley v Niland [1984] 2 NSWLR 104, Simplot Australia Pty Ltd v Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (1996) 69 FCR 90
REPRESENTATION:	APPLICANT D Hillard, solicitor RESPONDENT C Ronalds, barrister
ORDERS:	1. The Respondents' application is dismissed.; 2. The matter is listed for a case conference on a date to be fixed

REASONS FOR DECISION

Nature of the Preliminary Application

1 Mr Carr alleges he is addicted to methadone. On 1 August 2002 he lodged a complaint with the President of the Anti-Discrimination Board (the Board) alleging disability discrimination in employment.

2 Subsequent to the lodging of this complaint, Mr Carr lodged a further complaint with the Board on 11 September 2002 alleging victimisation by both Respondents.

3 This is a preliminary application in effect seeking summary dismissal of Mr Carr's disability discrimination complaint and summary dismissal of part of his victimisation complaint. Since we have yet to hear any evidence, our decision is not based on an assessment of Mr Carr's case.

4 The Respondents seek relief pursuant to s111(1) of the Act. The relief sought is opposed by Mr Carr. Although strictly the respondent to the application, for convenience Mr Carr is referred to as the Applicant.

Background to the Complaint

5 At all relevant times, Mr Carr was employed by the City of Botany Bay Council (the Council) as a general labourer. From 31 January 2002 until 23 August 2002, Mr Carr's manager was Mr Michael Rowan, the Second Respondent.

6 Mr Carr…