OV & OW v Members of the Board of the Wesley Mission Council

The appeal concerned the interpretation of provisions within the *Anti-Discrimination Act 1977* (NSW) and the *Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997* (NSW). The appellants, OV and OW, sought to challenge a decision of the Appeal Panel of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal. The core of the dispute involved allegations of discrimination on the ground of homosexuality, with the respondent, the Members of the Board of the Wesley Mission Council, seeking to rely on certain defences. The proceedings also involved an application for a non-publication order to protect the identity of children.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether the Wesley Mission Council could rely on the defence available to religious bodies under section 56 of the *Anti-Discrimination Act 1977* (NSW). This involved considering the meaning of terms such as "adherents of that religion," "doctrines," and "religious susceptibilities" in the context of the Council's actions and practices. Furthermore, the Court had to consider the proper construction of section 119 of the *Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997* (NSW) regarding appeals on questions of law.

The Court reasoned that the defence under section 56 of the *Anti-Discrimination Act 1977* (NSW) was not applicable in the circumstances of the case. It held that the "act or practice" in question did not relate to the appointment of persons to positions where adherence to particular religious doctrines was a genuine occupational qualification. The Court also found that the Appeal Panel had erred in its interpretation of the relevant provisions, leading to an incorrect decision.

Consequently, the Court of Appeal allowed the appeal in part, setting aside the order made by the Appeal Panel. The matter was remitted to the Equal Opportunity Division for further consideration in accordance with the Court's reasons. The Court also amended an interim order to permanently prohibit the publication of information tending to reveal the identity of the appellants, who were to be referred to by pseudonyms. The cross-appeal was dismissed.