Search results

By this instrument, the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (the “Commission”) grants to the Trustees of the Roman Catholic Church for the Archdiocese of Sydney (the “Trustees”) a temporary exemption pursuant to s 44(1) of the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth) (the “SDA”), in the terms set out in section 3 below.

The Catholic Education Office ("CEO"), Archdiocese of Sydney, applied to the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission for a temporary exemption to allow the CEO to discriminate against women by offering primary teacher training scholarships to male students only.

By this instrument, the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (the "Commission") declines to grant to the Catholic Education Office, Archdiocese of Sydney (the "CEO") a temporary exemption pursuant to section 44(1) of the Sex Discrimination Act (Cth) 1984 (the "Act"), in relation to the operation of sections 21(2)(a) and 22(1) of the Act.

Click here to return to: Notice of inquiry: Application for exemption under Sex Discrimination Act section 44: Catholic Education Office Scholarships for Male Trainee Teachers

I am writing on behalf of the Catholic Education Office, Archdiocese of Sydney, ('the CEO') to request an exemption under section 44 of the Sex Discrimination Act ('the Act').

However, as discussed with Ms Dennett, there are a number of matters arising from the evidence of the Attorney-General’s Department (the “Department”) on which the Commission seeks to assist the Committee by providing some further information and clarification. As discussed with Ms Dennett, we considered it appropriate to copy this letter to the Department.

2. First, the Bill is unnecessary because it is unlikely to achieve its stated purpose; that is to address the problem of the imbalance in the number of male and female school teachers and the assumed effect of that imbalance on the education of male school students. In that regard the Commission notes that there is little available evidence which suggests that proposed amendment would increase…

For the purposes of this Act, a person (discriminator) discriminates against another person (aggrieved person) on the ground of a disability of the aggrieved person if the discriminator requires the aggrieved person to comply with a requirement or condition:

The definitions of discrimination include both 'direct' and 'indirect' discrimination, with the exception of the definition of discrimination on the ground of family responsibilities, which is limited to direct discrimination.

The DDA covers discrimination on the ground of disability, including discrimination because of the use of a therapeutic device or aid;1 accompaniment by a carer or assistant;2 or accompaniment by an assistance animal.3

The Australian Human Rights and Commission (the Commission) makes this submission to the Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs in its Inquiry into the Disability Discrimination and Other Human Rights Legislation Amendment Bill 2008 (the Bill).

The DDA covers discrimination on the ground of disability, including discrimination because of the use of a therapeutic device or aid, accompaniment by a carer or assistant or accompaniment by an assistance animal.