Menzies v Owen

Case [2014] QCAT 661


CITATION: Menzies and anor v Owen [2014] QCAT 661
PARTIES: Richelle Menzies
(First Applicant)
Rhonda Bruce
(Second Applicant)
v
Ronald Owen
(Respondent)
APPLICATION NUMBER: ADC009-06; ADC011-06
MATTER TYPE:

Anti-discrimination matters

HEARING DATE: 2 - 3 June 2014
HEARD AT: Brisbane
DECISION OF: Member Ann Fitzpatrick
DELIVERED ON: 17 December 2014
DELIVERED AT: Brisbane
ORDERS MADE:

1. The Respondent Ronald Owen is to make a private apology and retraction to the Applicant, Richelle Menzies. The apology and retraction is to be delivered to the Applicant’s legal representatives by 9 January, 2015. The apology and retraction must be genuine and unqualified and must express regret for the offence, hurt, humiliation and anxiety caused to Ms Menzies by his contraventions of section 124A of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 arising out of the report to Council tabled on 6 September, 2005 and the newsletter distributed in September, 2005.

2. The Respondent Ronald Owen is to make a private apology and retraction to the Applicant, Rhonda Bruce. The apology and retraction is to be delivered to the Applicant’s legal representatives by 9 January, 2015. The apology and retraction must be genuine and unqualified and must express regret for the offence, hurt, humiliation and anxiety caused to Ms Bruce by his contraventions of section 124A of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 arising out of the report to Council tabled on 6 September, 2005, the newsletter distributed in September, 2005 and the letter headed “No Human Rights for Non Humans” published on the owenguns.com website and the lockstockandbarrel.org website.

3.    The Applicants are to file and serve any submissions in relation to costs of the proceedings by 16 January, 2015.

4.    The Respondent is to file and serve any submission by 3 February, 2015.

5.    The Applicants are to file and serve any submissions in reply by 10 February, 2015.

CATCHWORDS:

Anti-discrimination - Vilification on the ground of sexuality – public act – incitement – reasonable conduct – good faith – public interest.

Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 (Qld) ss 4A, 124A, 206, 209, Preamble - ss 6(b) and (c)

Catch the Fire Ministries v Islamic Council of Victoria Inc (2006) 15 VR 207
Deen v Lamb [2001] QADT 20
GLBTI v Wilks [2007] QADT 27
Jones v Toben (2002) 71 ALD 629
 McGlade v Lightfoot (2002) 124 FCR 106
Menzies & Ors v Owen [2008] QADT 20
Owen v Menzies & Ors [2010] QSC 387
Owen v Menzies & Anor [2011] QCA 241
Owen v Menzies & Anor [2012] QCA 170
Menzies & Anor v Owen [2013] QCATA 527
Silberberg v The Builders Collective of Australia Inc [2007] FCA 1512

APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):

APPLICANT: Richelle Menzies and Rhonda Bruce represented by Mr S Hamlin-Harris of Counsel instructed by Caxton Legal Centre.
RESPONDENT: Ron Owen represented by Mr R Haddrick of Counsel instructed by SK Lawyers.

REASONS FOR DECISION

Background

  1. Prior to the hearing in this matter on 2 and 3 June, 2014, there was extensive litigation between the parties.[1] The matter was heard afresh on those…

Continue reading Menzies v Owen

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Menzies v Owen [2014] QCAT 661
Case
[2014] QCAT 661
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This case, Menzies v Owen, involved Richelle Menzies and Rhonda Bruce as applicants, and Ronald Owen as the respondent. The applicants sought relief against the respondent for breaches of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1991, specifically section 124A, which prohibits vilification on the ground of sexuality. The dispute arose from the respondent’s report to Council, newsletter distribution, and a letter published on websites, all of which the applicants argued constituted vilification of individuals based on their sexuality.

The primary legal issues the court addressed were whether the respondent's actions constituted vilification under the Anti-Discrimination Act and, if so, what appropriate remedies should be imposed. The court considered whether the respondent's conduct was a public act, whether it incited hatred, contempt, or severe ridicule, and if the respondent's actions were reasonable and conducted in good faith for the public interest.

In its decision, the court found that the respondent's actions did indeed constitute vilification as defined by the Act. The court held that the report, newsletter, and letter collectively targeted individuals based on their sexuality, inciting hatred and severe ridicule. It was further determined that the respondent's actions were not reasonable or conducted in good faith for the public interest. Consequently, the court ordered the respondent to issue private apologies and retractions to the applicants, expressing genuine regret for the harm caused. The court also set timelines for the filing and serving of submissions regarding costs.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The Respondent Ronald Owen is to make a private apology and retraction to the Applicant, Richelle Menzies. The apology and retraction is to be delivered to the Applicant’s legal representatives by 9 January, 2015. The apology and retraction must be genuine and unqualified and must express regret for the offence, hurt, humiliation and anxiety caused to Ms Menzies by his contraventions of section 124A of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 arising out of the report to Council tabled on 6 September, 2005 and the newsletter distributed in September, 2005.

2. The Respondent Ronald Owen is to make a private apology and retraction to the Applicant, Rhonda Bruce. The apology and retraction is to be delivered to the Applicant’s legal representatives by 9 January, 2015. The apology and retraction must be genuine and unqualified and must express regret for the offence, hurt, humiliation and anxiety caused to Ms Bruce by his contraventions of section 124A of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 arising out of the report to Council tabled on 6 September, 2005, the newsletter distributed in September, 2005 and the letter headed “No Human Rights for Non Humans” published on the owenguns.com website and the lockstockandbarrel.org website.

3. The Applicants are to file and serve any submissions in relation to costs of the proceedings by 16 January, 2015.

4. The Respondent is to file and serve any submission by 3 February, 2015.

5. The Applicants are to file and serve any submissions in reply by 10 February, 2015.

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.