FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| GAMA v QANTAS AIRWAYS LIMITED (No.2) | [2006] FMCA 1767 |
| HUMAN RIGHTS – Race Discrimination − where applicant claimed discrimination in the course of his employment − where applicant alleged the use of racist comments by co-workers and superiors − where applicant claimed discrimination in relation to reporting requirements and general treatment in respect of sick leave and work attendance − where applicant claimed respondent failed to offer him the same conditions of work and opportunities for training and promotion offered to other employees − whether inference can be drawn that the racially discriminatory conduct occurred − where applicant alleged management employees were aware of and participated in discriminatory conduct − whether respondent vicariously liable for breaches of the Race Discrimination Act 1975 pursuant to s.18A. HUMAN RIGHTS − Disability Discrimination − where applicant alleged he was treated less favourably because of his disability following workplace injuries and the sequelae of those injuries and their treatment − where applicant claimed the respondent denied him access to or limited his access to opportunities for promotions, transfer or training on the grounds of his disability − where the applicant alleged the discriminatory conduct engaged in was within the actual or apparent authority of the respondent’s employees − whether the respondent failed to take reasonable precautions or exercise due diligence to avoid the conduct − whether respondent vicariously liable under s.123 Disability Discrimination Act 1992 for the discriminatory conduct. DAMAGES − Assessment − where applicant’s claims of race and disability discrimination partially made out − whether medical assessment supports an argument the found discriminatory events contributed to the applicant’s depressive illness − assessment of damages for psychiatric injury − assessment of damages for past and future medical expenses − whether an apology should be the subject of an order of the court. |
| Disability Discrimination Act 1992, ss.5, 6, 11, 15, 123 Racial Discrimination Act 1975, ss.9, 15, 18A, 18C International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination, Article 5 |
| Gama v Qantas Airways Limited (No. 1) [2006] FMCA 11 |
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Gama v Qantas Airways Ltd (No 2) and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2006] FMCA 1767
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the court were whether it could be inferred that the alleged racially discriminatory conduct occurred, and if the respondent could be held vicariously liable for breaches of the Race Discrimination Act 1975 and the Disability Discrimination Act 1992. The court needed to determine if the respondent failed to take reasonable precautions or exercise due diligence to prevent the discriminatory conduct, and if management employees were aware of and participated in the discriminatory behaviour. Moreover, the court had to assess the damages, including psychiatric injury and medical expenses, and consider whether an apology should be ordered as part of the court's final orders.
The court found that Mr Gama's claims of race and disability discrimination were partially substantiated. It was determined that the discriminatory events contributed to Mr Gama's depressive illness, and the medical assessment supported this claim. The court awarded Mr Gama damages for breach of the Race Discrimination Act 1975 and the Disability Discrimination Act 1992, totalling $71,692.70 including interest. The court also reserved the matter of costs, pending further submissions. The court did not order an apology from the respondent, as it was not deemed necessary under the circumstances.
Orders
Orders of the court
1.
The Respondent to pay the applicant $71 692.70 as damages including interest for breach of s.9 of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 and s.15(2)(d) of the Disability Discrimination Act 1992.
2.
Costs reserved.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.