D'ALTO and CURTIN UNIVERSITY

The plaintiff, D'Alto, brought proceedings against Curtin University in the Federal Circuit Court, alleging discrimination on the basis of her impairment under the Equal Opportunity Act 1984 (WA). D'Alto claimed that the university discriminated against her by withdrawing her enrolment and requiring her to re-enrol, conditioned on obtaining a confirmation from a mental health practitioner that she was fit to return to study. This was due to threats she made to self-harm, which the university considered grounds for her withdrawal.

The court was required to determine whether the university's actions constituted discrimination as defined by the Act and whether there were any exceptions or justifications that could apply. The primary legal issue was whether the university's requirement for a mental health practitioner's confirmation was a proportionate and reasonable measure in the circumstances, considering D'Alto's threats to self-harm. The court also had to examine if the university had taken all necessary steps to accommodate D'Alto's impairment in line with the principles of equal opportunity.

The court found that while D'Alto's threats to self-harm were a serious concern, the university's actions did not constitute discrimination under the Act. It held that the requirement for a mental health practitioner's confirmation was a proportionate and reasonable measure to ensure the safety and well-being of D'Alto and other students. The court acknowledged the university's duty to provide reasonable adjustments to accommodate students with impairments but concluded that in this instance, the measures taken were appropriate. The decision was grounded on the need to balance the university's duty to maintain a safe educational environment with the rights of students with impairments.

The court dismissed D'Alto's claim, finding no discrimination had occurred. No orders were made in favour of the plaintiff.