Resolved complaint (310) about assistance animal and disability discrimination in goods, services and facilities

About the complaint

The complainant alleged he was asked to leave the respondent club because he was accompanied by an assistance animal. He said he had previously provided the club with documentary evidence that his dog is an assistance animal. On this occasion, he was again asked to provide this evidence but was unable to do so because his wallet had been stolen.

The club confirmed that the complainant was asked to leave because he was unable to produce evidence that his dog is an assistance animal. The club acknowledged it had previously sighted relevant documents demonstrating the complainant’s dog is an assistance animal.

The complaint was resolved by conciliation with an agreement that the club pay the complainant $2,000. The club also agreed to write to the complainant apologising for the incident giving rise to the complaint and confirming staff had been briefed that patrons only need to provide evidence that a dog is an assistance animal on one occasion.

Guidance on the use of these summaries

This is a summary of a selected complaint that has been resolved through our conciliation process. It's designed to help people better understand how complaints might be resolved and what outcomes are possible.

These summaries are for general guidance only and are not legal advice. If you need advice about your situation, you should seek independent legal support.

Please note:

• all complaints are de-identified
• complaints are resolved on a 'without admission of liability' basis
• some content may include confronting or offensive language.