NESTER AND ACT FIRE BRIGADE

AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
DISCRIMINATION TRIBUNAL

CITATION:NESTER AND ACT FIRE BRIGADE [2005] ACTDT 3
(27 JULY 2005)

DT03/19
Catchwords: Discrimination – effect of complainant not being re-instated to position -quantum of compensation and costs payable due to effluxion of time
Butcher and The Key King Pty Ltd (DT99/270 dated 23 March 2000)

Tribunal:Mr M H Peedom, Deputy President
Date:27 July 2005

AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY )

DISCRIMINATION TRIBUNAL ) NO: DT03/19

RE: KEN NESTER
Complainant
AND: ACT FIRE BRIGADE
Respondent

DECISION

Tribunal : Mr M H Peedom, Deputy President

Date : 27 July 2005

Decision :

The complainant is to be re-instated to operational duties as a Station Officer Grade A.

The respondent is to pay the complainant the sum of $82,500 which includes an amount specified as $18,000 in relation to expenses incurred by the complainant in connection with the hearing and $2,500 for hurt and humiliation, by way of compensation for the loss or damage suffered by the complainant as the result of the unlawful conduct of the respondent less the sum of $47,500 already paid by the respondent to the complainant. Therefore, the respondent is ordered to pay the complainant the sum of $35,000.

…………………………
Deputy President

AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

DISCRIMINATION TRIBUNAL

APPEARANCE DETAILS

To be completed by Member's Staff
________________________________________________________________________
FILE NO: DT03/19

COMPLAINANT: KEN NESTER
RESPONDENT: ACT FIRE BRIGADE

COUNSEL APPEARING: COMPLAINANT: MR A JORY
RESPONDENT: MR D KETTLE

SOLICITORS: COMPLAINANT: KEN JOHNSTON BEDFORD
& CO

RESPONDENT: ACT GOVERNMENT SOLICITOR

OTHER: COMPLAINANT:
RESPONDENT:

TRIBUNAL MEMBER: MR M H PEEDOM, DEPUTY PRESIDENT

DATE OF HEARING: 27 JULY 2005 PLACE: CANBERRA

DATE OF DECISION: 27 JULY 2005 PLACE: CANBERRA

COMMENT:ORAL DECISION GIVEN – TRANSCRIPT AVAILABLE

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter involved a complaint by Nester against the ACT Fire Brigade, raising issues of discrimination and compensation. The Federal Circuit Court was tasked with determining whether Nester had been unlawfully discriminated against and, if so, to award appropriate compensation. The court also needed to consider the impact of the passage of time on the quantum of compensation and costs.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether Nester had been unlawfully discriminated against by the ACT Fire Brigade. Additionally, the court had to determine the appropriate amount of compensation to be awarded, taking into account the expenses Nester incurred, the hurt and humiliation suffered, and the time elapsed since the discrimination occurred. The court also needed to decide whether the passage of time should reduce the amount of compensation awarded.

In addressing these issues, the court found that Nester had indeed been unlawfully discriminated against by the ACT Fire Brigade. The court considered the nature and impact of the discrimination on Nester, as well as the expenses incurred and the hurt and humiliation suffered. In calculating the compensation, the court took into account the sum already paid by the respondent and the impact of the time that had elapsed. The court ordered the respondent to pay Nester $35,000, which represented the compensation due after accounting for the sum already paid and the passage of time. The court also ordered the respondent to re-instate Nester to operational duties as a Station Officer Grade A.

The court's final orders included the re-instatement of Nester to operational duties and the payment of $35,000 in compensation to Nester, reflecting the court's determination of the appropriate amount of compensation and costs.

Orders of the court

Decision :

1. The complainant is to be re-instated to operational duties as a Station Officer Grade A.

2. The respondent is to pay the complainant the sum of $82,500 which includes an amount specified as $18,000 in relation to expenses incurred by the complainant in connection with the hearing and $2,500 for hurt and humiliation, by way of compensation for the loss or damage suffered by the complainant as the result of the unlawful conduct of the respondent less the sum of $47,500 already paid by the respondent to the complainant. Therefore, the respondent is ordered to pay the complainant the sum of $35,000.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established