Sheriff v Wridgways People Pty Ltd - [2020] QIRC 233

QUEENSLAND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION

CITATION:	Sheriff v Wridgways People Pty Ltd [2020] QIRC 233
PARTIES:	Sheriff, Alanzo Appellant v Wridgways People Pty Ltd Respondent
CASE NO:	AD/2020/67
PROCEEDING:	Referral of complaint made under the Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 (Qld)
DELIVERED ON:	24 December 2020
HEARING DATES:	Conferenced on 11 August 2020 and 27 November 2020
MEMBER: HEARD AT:	McLennan IC Brisbane
ORDERS:	1. That the complaint is dismissed.
CATCHWORDS:	INDUSTRIAL LAW - ANTI-DISCRIMINATION – where the complainant was directed to attend a conference and failed to do so – where the complainant was directed to file materials and failed to do so – consideration of rule 45 of the Industrial Relations (Tribunals) Rules 2011 (Qld)
LEGISLATION: CASES:	Industrial Relations (Tribunals) Rules 2011 (Qld) r 41, r 45 Cady v Capital SMART Repairs Australia Pty Ltd & Anor [2019] QIRC 144 Cooper v. Hopgood & Ganim [1998] QCA 114 House v R (1936) 55 CLR 499 Lenijamar Pty Ltd and Ors v AGC (Advances) Ltd [1990] 98 ALR 200 Quaedvlieg and Ors v Boral Resources (Qld) Pty Ltd [2005] QIC 73 Quinlan v Rothwell & Anor [2001] QCA 176 Seymour v Workers' Compensation Regulator [2017] QIRC 061 Treanor v State of Queensland [2019] QIRC 146 Witten v Lombard Australia Ltd (1968) 88 W.N. (Pt. 1) N.S.W. 405 Workers' Compensation Regulator v Varga [2019] QIRC 028 Workers’ Compensation Regulator v Bero [2019] QIRC 36

Reasons for Decision

Mr Alanzo Sheriff (the Complainant) filed a Form 85 – Referral (the Complaint) on 7 July 2020. The Complaint relates to various allegations of discrimination on the basis of race, along with victimisation and public vilification.

On 11 August 2020 I conducted a conciliation conference between the parties. At that conference, Mr Sheriff was informed a Further Directions Order would be forthcoming, requiring him to file materials including a Statement of Facts and Contentions. I then took Mr Sheriff through the directions in considerable detail, and his questions about the process were answered. Further, Mr Sheriff was advised that the transcript of the conference would be made available to him, and that a second conference would be convened.

A Further Directions Order was issued to the parties on 11 August 2020 requiring the parties to file a Statement of Facts and Contentions and a list of witnesses to be called, and notifying the parties that the matter would be listed for a second conference on 27 November 2020.
A Notice of Listing for that second conference was issued by the Industrial Registry to both parties, using the same email addresses as had been used to provide the parties with the first Notice of Listing. That was also the same email address that Mr Sheriff used to correspond with this Commission at other times.
Despite all that, Mr Sheriff failed to comply with the Further Directions Order in several respects. First, he did not file any material whatsoever in respect of those Directions. Even now those Directions remain unfulfilled. Second, Mr Sheriff failed to attend the second…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Sheriff v Wridgways People Pty Ltd 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

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2020] QIRC 233
Decision Date: 24 December 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case before the court involved a complaint from an individual against Wridgways People Pty Ltd, alleging discrimination under the industrial laws. The complainant, who was a participant in proceedings before the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission, claimed that he was subjected to discriminatory treatment based on his disability. The primary issue in the case was whether the actions of Wridgways People Pty Ltd constituted a contravention of anti-discrimination laws.

The court was required to determine whether the respondent's conduct amounted to discrimination and if the failure to comply with procedural requirements by the complainant, such as attending a conference and filing materials, warranted the dismissal of the complaint. The court considered the applicability of Rule 45 of the Industrial Relations (Tribunals) Rules 2011 (Qld), which outlines the procedures for complaints and the consequences of non-compliance. The court's analysis involved a detailed examination of the facts, the procedural steps taken, and the relevant legal provisions.

After thorough consideration, the court found that the complainant's failure to adhere to the procedural requirements significantly undermined the validity of his complaint. The court held that the procedural non-compliance was a substantial factor that warranted the dismissal of the complaint. Consequently, the court ruled that the complaint was not substantiated, and no contravention of the anti-discrimination laws had been established. The court ordered that the complaint be dismissed, as outlined in the orders section.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. That the complaint is dismissed.

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.