Rodriguez v Technical and Further Educations Commission

Civil and Administrative Tribunal

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:

Rodriguez v Technical and Further Educations Commission [2024] NSWCATAD 141

Hearing dates:

14 February 2024

Date of orders:

23 May 2024

Decision date:

23 May 2024

Jurisdiction:

Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division

Before:

C Mulvey, Senior Member

Decision:

(1)   Leave to proceed with the complaint of discrimination on the ground of race is refused.

(2)   Leave to proceed with the complaint of discrimination on the ground of disability is refused.

(3)   Leave to proceed with the complaint of victimisation is refused.

Catchwords:

EQUAL OPPORTUNITY — leave to proceed — principles applying to grant of leave — race discrimination in education — disability discrimination — victimisation

Legislation Cited:

Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW)

Cases Cited:

CZH v University of Technology Sydney [2017] NSWCATAD 82

Director General, Department of Education & Training v FP and FQ on behalf of FR (EOD) [2003] NSWADTAP 51

Director General, Department of Education and Training v ZG [2007] NSWADTAP 50

Ekermawi v Administrative Decisions Tribunal of New South Wales & Ors [2009] NSWSC 143

Prakash v Bobb Borg Enterprises Pty Ltd [1999] NSWADT 73

Category:

Principal judgment

Parties:

Monica Silvana Suarez Rodriguez (Applicant)
Technical and Further Educations Commission (Respondent)

Representation:

Solicitors:
Applicant (self-represented)
Minter Ellison (Respondent)

File Number(s):

2023/00461285

Publication restriction:

None

REASONS FOR DECISION

1. The applicant, Ms Monica Silvana Suarez Rodriguez, complained that she was discriminated against on the basis of disability and race by the respondent.

2. The President of Anti-Discrimination NSW declined both Ms Rodriguez’s complaint of discrimination and victimisation. The complaint was declined pursuant to s 92(1)(a)(i) of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (the AD Act) for the reason that it was lacking in substance.

3. The matter is before the Tribunal to determine whether the applicant should be granted leave to proceed under s 96 of the AD Act.

Relevant legislation

4. Section 4 of the AD Act defines “race”:

race includes colour, nationality, descent and ethnic, ethno-religious or national origin.

5. Section 7 provides and provided at the relevant dates:

7 What constitutes discrimination on the ground of race

(1)   A person (the perpetrator) discriminates against another person (the aggrieved person) on the ground of race if the perpetrator—

(a)   on the ground of the aggrieved person’s race or the race of a relative or associate of the aggrieved person, treats the aggrieved person less favourably than in the same circumstances, or in circumstances which are not materially different, the perpetrator treats or would treat a person of a different race or who has such a relative or associate of a different race, or

(b)   on the ground of the aggrieved person’s race or the race of a relative or associate of the aggrieved person, segregates the aggrieved person from persons of a different race or from persons who have such a relative or associate of a different race, or

(c)   requires the aggrieved person to comply with a requirement or condition with which a substantially higher proportion of persons not of…