INTERNATIONAL (AUSTRALIA) LIMITED v TELSTRA CORPORATION LIMITED
Nos. H95/34, H95/51
Number of pages - 1
COURTHUMAN RIGHTS AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION HRNGDisability Discrimination Act 1992 Sir Ronald Wilson (Inquiry Commissioner) Sydney, 28-29 August 1995 (hearing), 6 September 1995 (decision) ORDER#DATE 6:9:1995 #ADD 24:6:1997 Counsel for complainant: Mr John Basten QC Counsel for respondent: Mr Alan Archibald QC Order for relief made. JUDGE1Sir Ronald Wilson (Inquiry Commissioner) BACKGROUND 1. I refer to the decision of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission ("the Commission") dated 19 June 1995 in respect of this matter in which I found the complaint of discrimination alleged by Disabled People's International (Australia) Limited ("DPI") pursuant to the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth) to be substantiated. A hearing into the relief, if any, to be granted in this matter was held by the Commission on 28 and 29 August 1995. ORDER AS TO JOINDER 2. Prior to the hearing into the question of relief, the Commission received notification from the solicitor for DPI that DPI had been placed in receivership and was unable to continue with the proceedings. A Notice of Motion dated 17 August 1995 to the Commission requested orders that the Australian Association of the Deaf ("AAD") be substituted for DPI in the inquiry into relief. 3. At the commencement of the inquiry into relief, I made the order that pursuant to s.84 of the DDA, AAD be joined as a party to the proceedings. RELIEF 4. In respect of the relief to be granted to the complainants, I make the following orders: (a) In accordance with paragraphs (b) to (g) hereunder, the respondent shall be obliged to provide a tele-typewriter ("TTY") to persons who are certified by an audiologist to be profoundly deaf. (b) The respondent discharge its obligation to supply TTYs by providing or causing to be provided to each eligible applicant the following voucher or vouchers: (i) one voucher for $600 for the acquisition of a TTY; and (ii) not less than 5 years after the provision of a voucher under sub-paragraph (i) or alternatively an additional voucher under sub-paragraph (iii), one additional voucher for $600 for the acquisition of a replacement TTY; and (iii) within 5 years of the provision of a TTY under sub- paragraph (i) in the event of uninsured total failure or destruction of the original TTY through no fault of the user, one additional voucher for $600 for the acquisition of a replacement TTY. (c) Each such voucher in (b)(i) to (iii) above may be applied towards the acquisition of a TTY costing less than $600, provided that any balance beyond the actual price of the TTY may be available to be applied towards maintenance costs. Alternatively, the voucher may be applied towards the acquisition of a TTY costing $600 or more. (d) The respondent is not obliged to supply a TTY to a profoundly deaf person who is eligible for the Commonwealth Government's equipment access program pursuant to its Disability Strategy Policy provided that the detailed prescription of this clause shall be subject to liberty to apply prior to the grant of the first voucher, it being my intention that this clause should not operate to the prejudice of an eligible applicant. (e) The respondent's obligation to supply TTYs shall be limited to a single unit for each household in respect of which a permanent resident is a person within the class described in paragraph (a). (f) The provision of vouchers pursuant to paragraph (b) shall commence upon the earlier to occur of: (i) 1 March 1996; or (ii) the expiration of two weeks after the determination of the proceeding instituted by the respondent in the Federal Court of Australia (No. G519\1995) to review the decision of the Commission referred to in paragraph (a) of this determination. (g) The parties shall have liberty to apply to the Commission for amending orders or for further or other orders as the circumstances require.
