Hardiman v Parramatta City Council

Civil and Administrative Tribunal

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:

Hardiman v Parramatta City Council [2025] NSWCATAD 259

Hearing dates:

17 and 18 February 2025; Decision reserved on 24 April 2025

Date of orders:

31 July 2025

Decision date:

31 July 2025

Jurisdiction:

Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division

Before:

H J Dixon SC, Senior Member
K Stubbs, General Member

Decision:

(1) The application is granted in part.

(2) The Respondent discriminated against the Applicant in the terms it provided services to a reserved in contravention of s 49M (1)(b) of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977.

(3) The matter is to be relisted to deal with relief, if any, to be granted.

Catchwords:

Human Rights – disability discrimination – indirect discrimination – council services

Legislation Cited:

Anti-Discrimination Act 1977, ss 4, 4A, 49A, 49B, 49C, 49M

Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013, ss 36

Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth)

Equal Opportunity Act 1984 (VIC), s 17

Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth), s 9

Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth)

Cases Cited:

Australian Iron and Steel Pty Ltd v Banovic (1989) 168 CLR 165

Catholic Education Office v Clarke [2004] FCAFC 197

Department of Foreign Affairs v Styles (1989) 23 FCR 251

Hurst v State of Queensland [2006] FCAFC 100

Mandla v Dowell Lee [1993] 2 AC 548

Nojin v Commonwealth of Australia [2012] FCAFC 192; 208 FCR 1

Secretary, Department of Education v FSO [2023] NSWCATAP 160

Sklavos v Australian College of Dermatologists (2017) FCAFC 128; 256 FCR 247

State of Victoria v Turner [2009] VSC 66

Waters v Public Transport Corporation (1991) CLR 349

Wright v Commissioner of Police [2014] NSWCATAP 67

Texts Cited:

Nil

Category:

Principal judgment

Parties:

Pamela Hardiman (Applicant)
The City of Parramatta Council (Respondent)

Representation:

Solicitors:
Applicant (Self-Represented)
McCabes Lawyers (Respondent)

Counsel:
B Fogarty (Respondent)

File Number(s):

2024/00196887

Publication restriction:

Nil

reasons for decision

1. On 26 October 2023, Ms Pamela Hardiman (“the Applicant”) made a complaint under the provisions of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (“the ADA”) to Anti-Discrimination NSW against the Parramatta City Council (“the Council”) alleging disability discrimination in the statutory area of goods and services.

2. The complaint concerned access to the Council’s off-leash dog park, the Dan Mahoney Reserve (“the Reserve”), located between Gladstone Street and Isabella Street, North Parramatta in New South Wales.

3. The essence of the complaint, as summarised by the Delegate of the President of Anti-Discrimination NSW, was that the Applicant, an amputee, left leg from hip, and who uses crutches to assist her mobility, uses the facilities of the Reserve for recreational purposes. However, due to her disability she finds the Reserve’s condition hazardous because there is no safe off-street parking and access to the Reserve is from a busy road. Closure of the toilets in the Reserve was also an issue.

4. The complaint was declined by a delegate of Anti-Discrimination NSW “under s 92(1)(a)(vi) of the Act, namely that the Respondent has taken appropriate steps to remedy or redress the conduct, or part of the conduct, complained of”.

5. The…