//
© 2026 Zoe. All rights reserved.
Zoe is a legal information platform. Always consult the Federal Register of Legislation for authoritative text.
[2014] QCAT 128
Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal
2014-01-07
Original judgment source is linked above.
This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (QCAT Act).
[1] Esther Harrison was employed by Terra Search Pty Ltd for four months in 2012. Ms Harrison complains that the managing director of Terra Search, Simon Beams, treated her unfavourably in comparison to other employees because of her sexuality. This complaint has been denied by the respondents.
[2] Ms Harrison is not legally represented in this proceeding at QCAT. She prepared her contentions which were to set out the facts and legal framework of her complaint. That document was brief but did contain sufficient information to comply with the directions made by the tribunal. Ms Harrison has not, despite a direction, filed any statements of evidence, preferring to rely on the original document she lodged with the Anti-Discrimination Commission to set out the evidence on which she will rely at the hearing of her complaint.
[3] The respondents have applied under section 47 of the QCAT Act to strike out the complaint before hearing. They submit that the contentions filed by Ms Harrison fail to identify why the alleged conduct amounts to unlawful discrimination and that they are left to speculate as to the grounds of the unlawful discrimination alleged against them.
[4] Their submissions however go on to analyse the allegations made against the respondents and they refer to the evidence on which they will to refute the allegations of unlawful discrimination. It is submitted by the respondents that Ms Harrison has not demonstrated any conduct by the respondents which amounts to treatment which is less favourable than treatment of any other person whose sexuality was not the same as Ms Harrison's sexuality.
[5] I do not agree with that submission. In her written complaint and in her filed contentions, Ms Harrison has compared the treatment she received on issues such as pay rates and the terms of use of company accommodation to other employees who did not share her sexual orientation. I consider that there is evidence referred to by Ms Harrison that is capable of supporting her complaint.
[6] In addition, Ms Harrison submits that she will cross-examine the respondents and their witnesses to provide further evidence to the tribunal in support of her complaint. The respondents have revealed in their filed contentions and submissions at least a basic understanding of the case they are required to meet. There is no unfairness to the respondents in permitting this complaint to proceed to a hearing. It is then that Ms Harrison will have the onus of convincing the hearing member that her case of unlawful discrimination has been established.
[8] Section 47 of the QCAT Act provides QCAT with the power to bring an early end to a proceeding if the tribunal considers the proceeding is lacking in substance or is otherwise an abuse of process. The tribunal must exercise caution before summarily dismissing a complaint that a person's human rights have been breached. A person seeking relief for an alleged breach of human rights should be afforded a reasonable opportunity to have their case heard and determined according to law.
[9] The Parliament of Queensland in the Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 expressly stated that everyone should have the right to equal protection and benefit of the law without discrimination, that the protection of fragile freedoms is best effected by legislation that reflects the aspirations and needs of contemporary society and that the quality of democratic life is improved by an educated community appreciative and respectful of the dignity and worth of everyone. I am satisfied that the objects of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 will best be achieved in this case by the complaint proceeding to a hearing in order to afford Ms Harrison a proper opportunity to establish if her human rights have been breached by the alleged conduct of the respondents.
[10] I am not satisfied that the respondents have established a ground for bringing an early end to this proceeding under section 47 of the QCAT Act. The case is not without substance and should be heard. Their application for strike out of the complaint is refused.
Harrison
Terra Search Pty Ltd & Ors [2014] QCAT 128
General Steel Industries Inc v Commissioner for Railways (NSW) [1964] HCA 69; (1964) 112 CLR 125
State of Queensland & Anor v Aigner [2013] QCATA 151
(1949) 78 CLR 62
(1964) 112 CLR 125