human rights commission case studies

Accessibility tools

• Skip to main content
• Accessibility

You are here:

• Case studies

Human rights case studies

Main site sub navigation

In this section:

• The top level navigation links
• Legislation
• Leading Authorities
• Judicial review decisions
• Case notes - discrimination
• Case notes - human rights
• Reports on unresolved human rights complaints
• Tribunal exemptions
• Intervention guidelines
• Interventions
• Call for case studies
• Submissions
• Health equity
• Age case studies
• Breastfeeding case studies
• Family responsibilities case studies
• Gender identity case studies
• Impairment case studies
• Lawful sexual activity case studies
• Parental status case studies
• Political belief or activity case studies
• Pregnancy case studies
• Race case studies
• Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander case studies
• Relationship status case studies
• Religious belief or religious activity case studies
• Sex discrimination case studies
• Sexuality case studies
• Trade union activity case studies
• Association case studies
• Sexual harassment case studies
• Unlawful requests for information case studies
• Victimisation case studies
• Vilification case studies
• Guides and toolkits
• Fact sheets
• Human Rights Month 2019 Speaker Series: Right to education
• Human Rights Month 2019 Speaker Series: Understanding the impact of Queensland's Human Rights Act
• Working it Through
• A Human Rights Act for Queensland
• 2023 theme: Universal means everyone
• Events and training
• Human Rights Week in your workplace
• Posters and supporter resources
• Why the hummingbird?
• Queensland human rights timeline

The case studies on this page include conciliated outcomes of human rights complaints and piggy-back complaints.

Human rights complaints

A human rights complaint is a complaint that a public entity has acted or made a decision that is incompatible with a person’s human rights, or has failed to properly consider human rights when making a decision. The complaint needs to indicate that one or more of the human rights in the Human Rights Act 2019 has been limited, and that the limitation is unreasonable and unjustified.

If a human rights complaint is accepted, the Commission’s role is to help the parties to resolve the complaint, usually through conciliation.

Piggy-back complaints

A complaint about an act or decision of a public entity that is dealt with under the Anti-Discrimination Act might also indicate that the act or decision is incompatible with human rights, or that the public entity has not properly considered human rights in making the decision. The human rights claim can be added to the discrimination complaint. This is called a piggy-back complaint.

Back to top

Apology for offensive comments based on gender identity

Improving processes to apply for disability parking, treatment of family with disabilities prompts training review, more responsive health services for man with klinefelter syndrome, resolution to complaint promoted family and kinship rights, access to health services for a man with disability seeking vaccination booster, perceptions of cultural safety in health service provision improved, alternative to mask-wearing provided for pregnant woman, quarantine exemption for woman picking up assistance dog, police express regret about asking traditional custodians to move on while exercising their cultural rights, unaccompanied children allowed to quarantine at home, employer takes steps to prevent breaches of privacy and reputation in future, suitable social housing secured for older woman with mobility issues, school and parents work together to support a child with a disability, woman's mental health deteriorates in hotel quarantine, transport service reviews disability policies and commits to training, family experiences challenges in hotel quarantine, approved absence from social housing allowed mother to pursue training opportunity, appropriate accommodation found for family's quarantine stay, health service acknowledges embarrassment experienced by patient with a disability, access to family during covid, crisis housing conflict resolved, quarantine exemption fast-tracked for child with asd, quarantine conditions exacerbate anxiety, illegal camping fines withdrawn, railway station upgrade for accessibility, disability awareness training for council, family needed accessible social housing.

Ontario Human Rights Commission

Language selector, ohrc social links.

Main Navigation

• The Ontario Human Rights Code
• The Human Rights System
• The Ontario Human Rights Commission
• The Human Rights Legal Support Centre
• The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario
• Frequently asked questions
• Family and marital status
• Gender identity and gender expression
• Race and related grounds
• Receipt of public assistance
• Record of offences
• Sexual orientation
• Goods, services and facilities
• Membership in vocational associations and trade unions
• Teaching human rights in Ontario
• Public education requests
• The OHRC at 60
• Backgrounders and research
• Brochures, fact sheets and guides
• Papers and reports
• Policies and guidelines
• Submissions

You are here

Case study 1: darlene, page controls, page content.

As part of a government program, Darlene, a grade 12 graduate, got a job with a local garden nursery. She was to help Mr. M., the owner, tend plants and shrubs, place orders and serve customers.

Mr. M's first review of Darlene's work showed that she was performing all her job duties exceedingly well. It was obvious that Darlene liked the work.

Over the next three months, Mr. M's behaviour toward Darlene began to change. As they worked, he would often put his hands on her shoulders and hips or lean over closer to her. At these times, she would quickly draw away from him. He then began to make offhand remarks about how he was sick of his wife and that he needed “satisfaction” from another woman.

Darlene did not encourage the comments or actions, nor did she say anything against them. However, she was becoming increasingly uncomfortable with the situation and tried to avoid the owner as much as possible. One day, Mr. M. asked her for a kiss. When she refused, he said “I know what's wrong with you. You're scared you're going to like it.”  A few days later, Mr. M. suggested that she come to his apartment to have sex with him. Darlene firmly refused, saying that she was seriously involved with her boyfriend. On several other occasions, the owner tried to get Darlene to come to his apartment.

In June, Mr. M. terminated Darlene's employment, saying he had no work for her, even though June is the busiest month of the year for the nursery.

Group discussion questions

• Did the nursery owner violate the  Human Rights Code ? If so, how?
• When Darlene first became uncomfortable with the nursery owner's  behaviour, why wouldn't she have said something?
• In this situation, would Darlene have had to say anything to the nursery  owner for him to know that he might be violating the  Code ?
• Is Darlene's termination a factor when assessing if her rights were violated?

Case study 2: Paramvir

In response to increased violence in its schools, a local school board adopted a policy prohibiting carrying weapons on school grounds. The following spring, the school administration learned that Paramvir, a Khalsa Sikh, was wearing a kirpan in school. The school wanted to implement its “no weapons” policy.

Of the estimated 250,000 Sikhs living in Canada at the time, more than 10% are Khalsa Sikhs—they have gone through the Amrit ceremony, symbolizing spiritual commitment. One of the duties of the Khalsa Sikh is to carry, at all times on his or her person, a kirpan, an article of faith symbolizing a spiritual commitment to law and morality, justice and order. A kirpan is a steel knife, encased and secured in a sheath, and generally worn out of sight under normal clothing.

After prolonged discussions with Paramvir's family and Sikh organizations, the school board amended its weapons policy to include kirpans. It forbade Sikh students to wear the kirpan to school—they could only wear a symbolic representation of the kirpan, provided it did not involve a metal blade that could be used as a weapon.

A Sikh teacher took the case to the Tribunal. At the hearing, it was argued that Sikh religious practices dictate that the kirpan must be made of iron or steel and worn at all times, otherwise the Khalsa would break their holy vows. It was shown that, while the kirpan has the appearance of a weapon, it has never been used in Canada as a weapon. Furthermore, it was argued that other school boards did not have a policy restricting kirpans. 

The school board argued that:

• Education was not a service covered by the Ontario  Human Rights Code  but was instead under the jurisdiction of the  Education Act
• The kirpan posed a risk as it looked like, and could be used as, a weapon
• Others could perceive the kirpan as an invitation to violence.
• Does the  Code  prevail, or have “primacy,” over the  Education Act ?
• Did the weapons policy discriminate against Khalsa Sikhs? How?
• Was the policy reasonable? Suggest some ways the school board  could accommodate Khalsa Sikhs without undue hardship – for example,  posing a safety risk?

Case study 3: Danté

After months of searching for a weekend job, Danté, who is Black, finally got an interview with the owner of a busy car wash and gas station. The owner seemed reluctant to hire him, but Danté managed to win him over. The owner gave him the job, saying that he would be working on a weekend shift with seven other young men, all students from the local area. The shift manager would train him on the car wash equipment.

On Danté's first day, the shift manager gave him only a few minutes of instruction on the equipment. Danté watched what the other men were doing, but when he asked questions, they were not very helpful.

Over the next few weekends, Danté concentrated on his work but because of certain events, he increasingly began to stay by himself. A few co-workers invited him to join their little group for lunch or breaks, but others consistently cracked ethnic and racial jokes, often within hearing of the shift manager. One day Danté overheard the manager say that Black people were responsible for increased violence in the community. This statement encouraged some co-workers, who had previously eaten lunch with Danté, to tell a couple of jokes about Black people. When they glanced at him as they told their jokes, he got up and walked away.

One busy Saturday afternoon, a whole section of the car wash equipment broke down because someone had allowed the system to become overheated. Danté had worked on that section until his break, when a co-worker took over. The system had broken down at some point after that.

The shift manager was furious and accused Danté of negligence. Danté replied that he believed the system was fine when he left for his break. Although Danté insisted that the equipment failure was not his fault, the shift manager fired him. Dante believed he was discriminated against because he is Black, while his co-workers and managers are White.

• Did the shift manager have good reason for firing Danté? Why?
• What factors would a human rights tribunal take into consideration?

Case study 4: Tammy

By age 11, Tammy had bowled for five years in the local recreation league. She and several others qualified to enter a province-wide competition sponsored by the Youth Bowling Council.

Tammy has cerebral palsy and uses a wheelchair, but she has some movement and coordination. So she could bowl, her father built a wooden ramp, the top of which rests in Tammy's lap. She lines up the ramp towards the bowling pins and lets the ball roll down the ramp.

Just before the competition, the Council ruled that Tammy was ineligible to take part. While the Council's rules allowed persons with disabilities to use special equipment to assist them in recreational bowling (provided the equipment did not add force or speed to the ball), they prohibited the use of such equipment in competitions.

The Tribunal and later the Supreme Court of Ontario heard Tammy’s application. The Youth Bowling Council argued that it had not violated her rights under the  Code , because Tammy wasn’t capable of the essential requirement of bowling—manually releasing the ball. The Council also contended that the use of special devices would make competition between the bowlers unfair, because the skills assessed would not be common to all competitors.

Tammy's lawyers argued that Tammy was bowling—she was using the ball to knock down pins. Also, the Youth Bowling Council had a duty to accommodate her under the  Code  by allowing her to use the ramp. Speed and accuracy tests showed that Tammy did not gain any advantage over other bowlers. Her ball speed was too low for maximum results and her accuracy no better than average.

• Could Tammy perform the essential requirement of bowling? Should this  argument have been a factor in determining whether a violation occurred?
• Should the Council have to accommodate Tammy (for example, should they  allow her to bowl in competitions with the ramp)?
• Would the Council experience undue hardship if it accommodated her in competitions? Would it change the sport too much? Give your reasons.

Case study 5: Kyle

Kyle is a young man who went to The Barking Frog, a bar in London, Ontario. He went on a “Ladies” Night,” when women are charged a lower cover charge than men. Bars across Ontario (and indeed across Canada and parts of the United States) routinely hold what are commonly called ladies’ nights, where women are charged a lower cover charge or no cover charge to enter the bar or are given discounts on their drinks. This practice has been common in Ontario and elsewhere for decades.

Kyle went to The Barking Frog, where the doorman told him the cover charge was $20 for the men but only $10 for the women in the group. Kyle was upset and was unwilling to pay the $20, so he did not enter the bar.

Kyle launched a human rights complaint claiming the different cover charges amounted to discrimination based on the ground of sex.

• Did Kyle face discrimination? If so, what type?
• What factors would be taken into account to determine if this differential  treatment violated the  Code ?
• How is substantive equality different from formal equality?

Case study 6: Rita

Rita and her family moved to the city from a remote community in the middle of the school year. Within a week, Rita was registered at the local high school and began attending classes. She travelled to and from school by school bus.

After two weeks at the new school, Rita was just beginning to settle into her classes. However, she was somewhat nervous about her history course. After her first class, the teacher made it clear that Rita had a lot of “catching up” to do, if she were to pass the course.

The following week, some students gave a presentation on Columbus' voyage in 1492 to the “New World.” There was lively discussion, and readings and prints were circulated depicting Columbus' arrival in various territories. There were several references made to “Indians and savages” that the colonists “had to defeat” to settle the New World.

As a member of the Cree Band, Rita was dismayed by the way the teacher portrayed Aboriginal persons in the presentation. She approached her teacher before class the next day to discuss the issue. As the class began, the teacher announced that Rita had concerns with the Columbus presentation. She then turned to Rita and asked her to give her version of the “Columbus discovery” from an Aboriginal point of view.

Caught off guard, Rita haltingly made several points, and then sat down quickly when several of the students began to snicker. Later that day on the bus ride home, some of the other students jeered at her, saying if she didn't like history the way it was taught, then she should drop out. She turned away and ignored them. The next day, the jeering continued in the hallway. When she went to her locker at lunch, someone had scrawled the words “gone hunting” on her locker door. Again, she ignored the curious students around her.

Rita told her parents about the incidents. They called the principal, who said she would give “hell” to the offenders. She also suggested that Rita should make more of an effort to fit in and get along with others.

• How should the teacher have handled Rita's concern over the  Columbus presentation?
• Should the principal deal with the situation in a different way?

Case study 7: Cindy

Cindy, 19, applied for a job at a nursing home as a nursing aide. She had previously worked part-time as a kindergarten teacher's aide and had also cared for children with mental and physical disabilities during her high school years. In her initial interview, the assistant administrator told Cindy she was an ideal candidate and that she probably would be hired.

She was given a pre-employment medical examination for her family doctor to complete. He confirmed that she could meet the requirement of being able to lift patients.

At a second meeting, the interviewer reviewed the completed medical form and noticed Cindy's hand. During the initial interview, the assistant administrator had not observed her left hand, on which the index, middle and ring fingers were much shorter than those on most hands. Following this, the interviewer and another nursing director spent much time discussing Cindy's disability and the job requirements. Even though they both really wanted to hire Cindy, they didn’t think she would be able to cope with the gripping or clasping that is needed to lift patients.

Although Cindy said she could perform the duties and had done similar tasks in her previous job with children with disabilities, she was not hired.

• Did the interviewer have reasonable grounds to believe that Cindy  could not do the job?
• On what basis did the interviewers assess that Cindy could not meet  a  bona fide  job requirement?
• What do you think the interviewer and the nursing director should have  decided? What are your reasons?

Case study 8: Maria

When Maria began working for the packaging company in 2003, her first name was Tony. She was hired as a general labourer on August 24, 2003. In 2008, she was accepted in the gender identity clinic and began transition from living as a man to living as a woman. She started the process of sex reassignment and developed female breasts as a result of hormone treatments. Maria says that she was harassed, subjected to a poisoned work environment and dismissed – all violations of the  Human Rights Code .

Maria said that Gerry, a lead hand and machine operator, played a central role in the harassment and the incident that led to her dismissal. The packing company said the allegations never happened. The company argued that it treated the applicant appropriately, considering her a man and treating her like other men until it received medical or legal documentation that she was a woman. They say they fired her because of her attitude and being involved in workplace conflicts that were her fault, as well as insubordination.

• In what ways do you think Maria might have experienced discrimination  in her employment?
• What reasons do you think Maria's supervisor would give for firing her?  What do you think of these reasons?
• What remedy do you think Maria should receive because she was  discriminated against?

Case study 9: Tawney

Tawney worked as a forest firefighter for the Province of British Columbia and was a member of the Initial Attack Forest Firefighting crew for a small area in the forests of BC. The crew’s job was to attack and suppress forest fires while they were small and could be easily contained. Her supervisors found her work satisfactory and had no reason to question her continuing ability to do the work safely and effectively.

After she had been successfully doing this job for three years, the government adopted a new series of fitness tests for forest firefighters. The tests were developed in response to a Coroner’s Inquest Report that recommended that only physically fit employees be assigned as front-line forest firefighters for safety reasons. The tests required that forest firefighters weigh less than 200 lbs. (with their equipment) and complete a run, an upright rowing exercise, and a pump carrying/hose dragging exercise within stipulated times.

The running test was designed to test the forest firefighters’ aerobic fitness. Subjects were required to run 2.5 kilometres in 11 minutes. After four attempts, Tawney failed to meet the aerobic standard, running the distance in 11 minutes and 49.4 seconds instead of the required 11 minutes. As a result, she was laid off.

Stating that the test unfairly discriminated against women, Tawney’s union brought a grievance on her behalf.

• ​ What do you think about having different standards for men and women?
• Do you think the test was a fair way of measuring a firefighter’s ability  to do the job?
• If Tawney was passed, even though her running time was below what  was required, is she being given preferential treatment over men?

Case study 10: Réjeanne

Based on  Quebec (Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse) v. Montreal (City); Quebec (Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse) v. Boisbriand (City) , [1999] 1 SCR 381 — 1999-02-24 Supreme Court of Canada — Canada (Federal)  http://canlii.ca/t/1fqmp

Réjeanne lived in Montreal. Her career goal was to become a horticulturalist. She had successfully passed a college course and completed an apprenticeship as a gardener with the city’s Botanical Gardens. When a suitable opening came up to work as a horticulturalist with the city, she immediately sent in her application.

Réjeanne was fully qualified for the position and was invited for an interview. She successfully passed the interview. However, she also had to undergo a physical check-up to confirm her suitability for the job. This check-up indicated she had a slight curvature of the spine called  scoliosis . Réjeanne was surprised to learn this, as she had never experienced any symptoms from this relatively common condition. In fact, she had never experienced any pain, nor had she suffered any limitation on her because of her condition. A later evaluation showed that Réjeanne was able to perform all the duties of a gardener-horticulturalist in complete safety to herself and others, and that there was no need to limit her duties.

When it became aware of Réjeanne’s condition, the city decided to hire another candidate who it thought would be less of a risk for back problems and therefore unlikely to incur increased health care costs later on. The city rationalized its decision saying that it had the right and even the responsibility to employ individuals who would pose the least potential cost to taxpayers.

Believing the city had rejected her application because of a handicap, Réjeanne made a complaint to the Human Rights Tribunal. Réjeanne alleged that the city acted in a discriminatory way that deprived her of unemployment insurance benefits, caused her a high level of stress and deeply humiliated her. The city responded that because Réjeanne had no functional limitations, it could not be said that she had a disability under Quebec’s  Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms .

• Why do you think that the city should or should not have hired Réjeanne?
• If it is possible that Réjeanne will develop back problems, do you think that  the city did the right thing by not hiring her?
• Do you think society’s view towards persons with disabilities has a positive  or negative impact on the barriers they face?

Case study 11: Alia and Ahmed

There are many people in Ontario who are deaf, deafened or hard of hearing. Some people may use sign language as their first language or preferred means of communication, and their inability in English will seriously impede their ability to communicate unless aided by interpretation. For these Ontarians, effective communication and getting fair access to services and employment is very hard.

Alia and Ahmed are parents who were both born deaf. They were expecting twins and would usually provide their own sign language interpreters for their medical visits. Unless an interpreter was present, communicating information was often frustrating for them. At the same time, any miscommunication about medical information could be dangerous.

Alia went into labour eight months into her pregnancy. She and her husband found themselves at the hospital without the aid of an interpreter. Neither the attending doctor nor the nurses could effectively communicate with the parents, who found this isolation difficult and frightening. After the babies were born, they were immediately taken away from the delivery room and put under observation in another area of the hospital. One nurse wrote on a piece of paper that the children were “fine.” Otherwise, no one gave any details about the twins’ condition to either Alia or Ahmed.

In their human rights complaint, Alia and Ahmed alleged that the hospital was providing unequal services because it did not accommodate their needs as deaf persons. The hospital replied that it was too hard to bring in interpreters on such short notice, and that it was too expensive to keep interpreters on call 24 hours a day.

• How would you feel if you were in the same situation as Alia or Ahmed?
• Whose responsibility is it to provide sign language interpreters in public  service sectors?
• How would this claim be covered under the  Code ?
• Do you think it’s unreasonable for deaf people to expect interpreters  to be available in emergency situations? What about in other non- emergency situations?

Case study 12: Marc

Marc is a gay 17-year-old student attending a publicly-funded Catholic high school. He wishes to go to the prom with a same-sex date. The prom is being held at a rental hall off school property.

The school principal and the Catholic School Board have said no on the grounds that this would be endorsing conduct contrary to the church’s teachings. Marc believes that this is a violation of his human rights. He is considering seeking a court injunction because the prom is only weeks away.

• What ground and social area does Marc’s application fall under?
• What competing rights are involved here? 

Book Prev / Next Navigation

6 Websites Where You Can Find Human Rights Case Studies

Human rights often feel like abstract concepts. To get a fuller understanding of how they are defended or violated in the real world, case studies are very useful. Through research and specific processes, case studies provide an in-depth look at individuals, groups, or situations over a certain period. Here are five websites where you can find human rights case studies:

Business for Social Responsibility (BSR)

BSR is a global nonprofit organization with a network of 250 member companies and other partners. Their mission is to develop sustainable business solutions and strategies through consultation, research, and collaboration. They work with international companies, government agencies, and NGOs.

On their website, they have many case studies on a variety of topics, including human rights. Many of the other topics overlap with human rights issues, such as climate change, healthcare, ethics and governance, and women’s empowerment. Human rights case studies include a collaboration between Kering (Kering Eyewear, Gucci, etc) and BSR on the status of women working in the Italian luxury supply chain.

UNESDOC Digital Library (UNESCO)

The UNESDOC Digital Library is an important element for the realization of UNESCO’s mission. The library gives access to documents, publications, and other materials either produced by UNESCO or relevant to UNESCO. That includes materials in education, natural sciences, social sciences, communication, and more. There are more than 350,000 documents dating back to 1945. In addition to the online library, there is a physical library and archives room.

By searching “human rights case studies” in the UNESDOC Digital Library, a variety of results come up. Some of these include global case studies on the impact of technology on human rights (published in 1993) and a document with case studies on human rights and encryption (published in 2016). There’s also a casebook on human dignity and human rights from 2011 that contains 30 case studies.

Security Human Rights Hub

The goal of this Knowledge Hub is to provide resources and tools for companies working in challenging environments. These companies deal with complex challenges. Many of them affect the human rights of local communities and threaten the safety and security of operations and staff. There have been many policy frameworks, documents, and tools created to help companies deal with these issues, but they are rarely shared widely. The Hub’s purpose is to bring these tools together.

The case studies section offers examples of companies around the world enacting good practices in dealing with security and human rights challenges. Case studies come from places like Columbia, Cameroon, the DRC, and Iraq.

Equality and Human Rights Commission

The Equality and Human Rights Commission is a non-departmental public body in Great Britain. It was first established by the Equality Act in 2006. Its goal is to “make Britain fairer” by serving as an expert organization and point of contact for public bodies, businesses, and policymakers.

Their selection of case studies is organized into topics like “Youth Cases,” “Balancing Human Rights,” and “How Human Rights Benefit Children and Young People’s Lives.” Many of the cases are presented within the context of human rights like the right to fair trial and protection from harm.

Business & Human Rights Resource Centre

The Business & Human Rights Resource Centre is a group of 13 trustees and 58 staff committed to advancing human rights in business. They track the human rights policy and performance of more than 9,000 companies in over 180 countries. The Centre focuses on positively impacting the lives of vulnerable people, collaborating with partners, and remaining objective.

In their case studies portal, the Centre has compiled cases that involve community-driven actions in response to business activities. You can search by business sector (agricultural, energy, sugar, etc) and human rights issues  (child labor, access to water, education, etc). You can also search by country/region or tools (how to: monitor impacts, access impacts, etc).

BBC World Service Trust Project

The BBC World Service Trust Project is a global education project. Using events, debates, and multi-lingual radio programs, the project seeks to educate individuals about their rights. For many years, they’ve used media solutions to spread awareness about poverty and human rights in areas like Asia, the Middle East, and Africa. Their website is called “I have a right to…”

On this website, you can find case studies from around the world on topics like freedom and equality, justice before the law, and freedom of expression . Each of the studies correlates to an article from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights . For example, the case study on privacy and the internet in the UK refers to Article 12, which is the right to privacy in the home, family, and correspondence.

Also consider reading our article about Resources to Research Human Rights Cases .

You may also like

16 Inspiring Civil Rights Leaders You Should Know

15 Trusted Charities Fighting for Housing Rights

15 Examples of Gender Inequality in Everyday Life

11 Approaches to Alleviate World Hunger 

15 Facts About Malala Yousafzai

12 Ways Poverty Affects Society

15 Great Charities to Donate to in 2024

15 Quotes Exposing Injustice in Society

14 Trusted Charities Helping Civilians in Palestine

The Great Migration: History, Causes and Facts

Social Change 101: Meaning, Examples, Learning Opportunities

Rosa Parks: Biography, Quotes, Impact

About the author, emmaline soken-huberty.

Emmaline Soken-Huberty is a freelance writer based in Portland, Oregon. She started to become interested in human rights while attending college, eventually getting a concentration in human rights and humanitarianism. LGBTQ+ rights, women’s rights, and climate change are of special concern to her. In her spare time, she can be found reading or enjoying Oregon’s natural beauty with her husband and dog.

Human Rights Case Law Project

• Vulnerable Persons Project

Published cases referring to the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld)

The UQ/Caxton Human Rights Case Law Project is an initiative of the UQ School of Law and  Caxton Legal Centre Inc . The aim of this project is to ensure that practitioners, researchers, students and members of the public have easy access to all published cases that refer to the  Human Rights Act 2019  (Qld). 

Case notes for all published decisions that mention the  Human Rights Act 2019  (Qld) will be added to this page. Please be patient with us – we are a small team so the case notes might not appear immediately, but we will do our best to complete them as quickly as possible.

This project is run by  Professor Tamara Walsh  ( UQ Pro Bono Centre ) and Bridget Burton (Caxton Legal Centre).

Current team members are: Laura Rowswell (Student Leader), Liisa Kuru (Assistant Leader), Rory Brown, Ben Cornwell, Carolyn Farago, Laura Hall, Anouk Hendriks, Thorida Kim, Sophie Little, Kano Nawagawa, Max Punin, Hannah Retief, Genevieve Rule, Imogen Ryan-Kerr, and Georgia Williams.

Many thanks to our founding members: Elizabeth Aisi, Linden Peacock and Tulli Seton.

Case notes are available by keyword below and in alphabetical order .

Case notes by keyword

Children and Families Civil Procedure Commercial Criminal Law and Corrective Services Cultural rights Discrimination Domestic Violence Education, Training and Employment Health, Mental Health and Guardianship Planning and Environment Political Freedoms Privacy and Confidentiality Public Law Considerations Tenancy and Social Housing

Children and Families

Ab v cd [2020] qcat 295, abd v director-general, department of justice and attorney-general [2021] qcat 57, am v director general department of justice and attorney general [2023] qcat 6, amd v director general, department of justice and attorney-general [2022] qcat 4, be v director-general, department of justice and attorney-general [2020] qcat 498, bpm v director-general, department of justice and attorney-general [2022] qcat 286, ca v director-general, department of justice and attorney general [2022] qcat 305, ca v director-general, department of justice and attorney-general [2020] qcat 452, cdc v director-general, department of justice and attorney-general ([2021]) qcat 112, coonan v registrar of births, deaths and marriages [2020] qcat 434.

Return to top

Civil Procedure

Angelopoulos v state of queensland [2021] qcat 421, brisbane marine pilots pty ltd (in liquidation) v general manager of maritime safety queensland, department of transport and main roads and ors (costs) [2022] qcat 225, dupois v queensland police & anor [2022] qsc 241, fitzgerald v venables & anor [2022] qsc 78, flowers v state of new south wales [2019] nswsc 1467, hutchison v state of queensland (queensland health) [2021] qirc 317, jdt v pdl (no 2) [2022] qdc 147, johnston & ors v carroll (apm, commissioner of the queensland police service) [2022] qsc 115, johnston & ors v commissioner of police (qld) & ors; witthahn & ors v chief executive of hospital & health services & director general of queensland health & ors; sutton & ors v commissioner of police (qld) & ors; baxter & ors v chief health officer & ors, knuth v queensland building and construction commission [2022] qcat 172, body corporate for the lakes-cairns cts 28090 v sunshine group australia pty ltd [2023] qcat 39, marino law v vc ([2021]) qcat 348, reef house property pty ltd & ors v commissioner for liquor and gaming regulation & anor [2021] qcat 383, tamarin pty ltd & otmoor pty ltd as trustee v wicks [2021] qcata 146, wagners cement pty ltd & anor v boral resources (qld) pty ltd & anor [2020] qsc 124, westpac banking corporation & anor v heslop & anor (no 2) [2020] qsc 256, criminal law and corrective services, attorney-general for the state of queensland v haynes [2020] qsc 348, attorney-general v carter [2020] qsc 217, baggaley v commonwealth director of public prosecutions [2020] qca 179, boyy v executive director of specialist operations of queensland corrective services [2019] qsc 283, commissioner of police v keating-jones [2022] qdc 56, crossman v queensland police service [2020] qdc 122 and 123, director-general, department of justice and attorney-general v map [2022] qcata 34, cultural rights, bowie v queensland police service and ors [2022] qlc 8, hannigan and associates pty ltd & anor v da cunha & anor [2022] qlc 14, waratah coal pty ltd v youth verdict ltd & ors (no 6) [2022] qlc 21, accoom v pickering [2020] qsc 388, discrimination, angelopoulos v state of queensland [2022] qcat 163, bb v state of queensland & ors [2020] qcat 496, burleigh town village pty ltd (3) [2022] qcat 285, dean-braieoux v state of queensland (queensland police service) [2021] qirc 209, fernwood womens health clubs (australia) pty ltd [2021] qcat 164, frost v state of queensland & ors [2020] qcata 144, gilbert v metro north hospital health service & ors [2020] qirc 084, gorgievski v gold coast city council & anor [2022] qcat 365, isles v state of queensland [2021] qcat 135, domestic violence, dlm v wer & the commissioner of police [2022] qdc 79, map v director-general, department of justice and attorney-general [2020] qcat 527, ed v director-general, department of justice and attorney-general [2021] qcat 56, dl v director-general, department of justice and attorney general ([2021]) qcat 61, sf v department of education [2021] qcat 10, adi v egi [2020] qdc 13, education, training and employment, abbott v state of queensland (department of education) [2021] qirc 113, amaya v state of queensland (queensland health) [2022] qirc 117, bakhash v state of queensland (department of education) [2022] qirc 362, basnayake v tafe queensland [2022] qirc 444, bezett v state of queensland (queensland fire and emergency services) [2023] qirc 048, bishop v state of queensland (queensland ambulance service) [2022] qirc 292, bj [2022] qcat 326, health, mental health and guardianship, adu [2021] qcat 70, adw [2021] qcat 453, am [2021] qcat 394, as [2022] qcat 148, attorney-general for the state of queensland v glh [2021] qmhc 4, bcc [2021] qcat 123, blk [2022] qcat 222, carne v crime and corruption commission [2021] qsc 228, cc [2020] qcat 367, planning and environment, cement australia (exploration) pty ltd & anor v east end mine action group inc & anor (no 4) [2021] qlc 22, optus mobile pty ltd v sunshine coast regional council & ors [2020] qpec 15, waratah coal pty ltd v youth verdict ltd & ors (no 5) [2022] qlc 4, waratah coal pty ltd v youth verdict ltd & ors [2020] qlc 33, political freedoms, sunny v state of queensland (queensland health) [2022] qirc 119, steinhardt v state of queensland (queensland health) [2022] qirc 111, bil v queensland police service - weapons licensing [2022] qcat 150, bell v state of queensland [2022] qsc 80, doedens v state of queensland (queensland ambulance service) [2022] qirc 263, collins v state of queensland (queensland health) [2022] qirc 215, morgan v parole board queensland [2022] qsc 280, privacy and confidentiality, aa v state of queensland (office of industrial relations) [2021] qcat 258, angelopoulos v silkwire pty ltd & anor [2022] qcat 52, benjamin stewart shannon v queensland police service [2022] qcat 158, dkm [2020] qcat 441, dkm [2020] qcat 443, fbn v director-general, department of justice and attorney-general [2020] qcat 260, health ombudsman v orc [2020] qcat 181, public law considerations, aitchison v queensland police service – weapons licensing [2023] qcat 45, amos v state of queensland (queensland health) [2022] qirc 197, balemi v ingles [2020] qcata 58, blomfield v state of queensland (queensland health) [2022] qirc, bloxham v state of queensland (queensland police service) [2022] qirc 37, brown v state of queensland (queensland ambulance service) [2022] qirc 312, tenancy and social housing, bowie v gela [2022] qcata 112, horizon housing company v ross [2020] qcat 41, imm v department of housing and public works [2020] qcata 73, the state of queensland through the department of housing and public works v tenant [2020] qcat 144.

• Solitary Confinement Report
• Case notes in alphabetical order

Annual report

2020/21 Annual Report for the Human Rights Case Law Project (PDF, 123.7 KB)

Please contact our group with any enquiries at [email protected] .

These case notes are intended to provide summarised general information only. They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied on as such.  If the subject matter of any case note relates to a transaction or matter of particular concern, you should seek your own independent formal legal advice from an admitted legal practitioner.  Please note, UQ does not offer legal services to the public.

UQ Law research

Connect with our researchers.

Collaborate with us to solve today's pressing challenges. Find out how we can work together . 

Find a researcher by name Find researchers by research area Research themes & challenges Potential HDR projects Summer/Winter research scholarships What's on

Follow UQ Law research on X

Subscribe for updates

Online resources

UQ Law Journal ANZ Maritime Law Journal Submissions and reports Deaths in Custody Project Domestic & Family Violence Bench Book Domestic Violence Case Studies Australian Feminist Judgements Project Human Rights Case Law Project  

All publications and resources

Funded projects

Research groups

Australian Centre for Private Law Centre for Public, International and Comparative Law Food Security and Intellectual Property Indigenous People and the Law Law and the Future of War​ Law and Religion in the Asia-Pacific Law, Science and Technology Marine and Shipping Law Unit UQ Solomon Islands Partnership

Human Rights

Weir v. u.s..

What's at stake

By completing this form, I agree to receive occasional emails per the terms of the ACLU's privacy statement .

24 Human Rights Cases

National Security

ACLU v. DOD – FOIA Case Seeking Biden Administration’s Presidential Policy Memorandum

Civil Liberties

Barrani v. Salt Lake City

Prisoners' Rights

Ashker v. Governor of California

Egbert v. Boule

Women's Rights

IACHR Petition for Domestic Workers Trafficked by Diplomats

Share this via Facebook Share this via X Share this via WhatsApp Share this via Email Other ways to share Share this via LinkedIn Share this via Reddit Share this via Telegram Share this via Printer

Events of 2020

Indian migrant workers sit atop a bus as others walk along an expressway to return to their home villages during a nationwide Covid-19 lockdown, New Delhi, India, March 28, 2020.

© 2020 Altaf Qadri/AP Photo

As More Climate Chaos Looms, Slashing Fossil Fuels Is Key

The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led government increasingly harassed, arrested, and prosecuted rights defenders, activists, journalists, students, academics, and others critical of the government or its policies.

The government continued to impose harsh and discriminatory restrictions on Muslim-majority areas in Jammu and Kashmir since revoking the state’s constitutional status in August 2019 and splitting it into two federally governed territories.

Attacks continued against minorities, especially Muslims, even as authorities failed to take action against BJP leaders who vilified Muslims and BJP supporters who engaged in violence.

The Covid-19 lockdown disproportionately hurt marginalized communities due to loss of livelihoods and lack of food, shelter, health care, and other basic needs.

The #MeToo movement has encouraged women to share their accounts of sexual harassment at work.

India’s law to address this has done little to improve the lives of millions of women employed in the informal sector, including domestic workers

He used to tell me: “Wear a short dress, you will look better in it.” When his children and grandchildren would go out, he would purposely stay home He would keep following me around. He would pat my back, but then his hands would wander I tried to ignore him. I knew no one would believe me if I told them, so I kept quiet. I put up with it because I had to earn to support my family.

My employer, he was a doctor, he grabbed my hand and made me sit in his lap. He told me he will give me sweets I felt really scared and uncomfortable. So, I ran away and quit. I did not say anything at home because I was too afraid to tell anyone. No one really cares to understand girls, it was better to just quit the job.

When I started work, I used to be scared of leaving home. In the residential estate where I worked, the guard would harass me. One day, the guard took out money, forced it into my hands and asked me to go with him. That day I cried endlessly when I went home and told my husband I wanted to go back to the village. My husband complained to the head of security who he knew, and the guard was quietly transferred. If my employers found out, it’s likely they would have blamed me, and I could have lost my job . That is why I kept quiet. For women like me, what is #MeToo? Poverty and stigma mean we can never speak out. There is no place safe for women like us. Not our workplaces, nor our homes, and not the road we take.

The Indian government should take urgent action to address sexual harassment in the workplace.

Fully enforce the Sexual Harassment at Work Law and ratify the ILO Violence and Harassment Convention.

Jammu and Kashmir

Hundreds of people remained detained without charge in Jammu and Kashmir under the draconian Public Safety Act, which permits detention without trial for up to two years.

In June, the government announced a new media policy in Jammu and Kashmir that empowers the authorities to decide what is “fake news, plagiarism and unethical or anti-national activities” and to take punitive action against media outlets, journalists, and editors. The policy contains vague and overbroad provisions that are open to abuse and could unnecessarily restrict and penalize legally protected speech. The government also clamped down on critics, journalists, and human rights activists.

The restrictions, including on access to communications networks, since August 2019 adversely affected livelihoods, particularly in the tourism-dependent Kashmir Valley. The Kashmir Chamber of Commerce and Industries estimated that the first three months of the lockdown to prevent protests since August 2019 cost the economy over US$2.4 billion, for which no redress was provided. Losses nearly doubled since the government imposed further restrictions to contain the spread of Covid-19 in March 2020. The pandemic made access to the internet crucial for information, communication, education, and business. However, even after the Supreme Court said in January that access to the internet was a fundamental right, authorities permitted only slow-speed 2G mobile internet services, leading doctors to complain that the lack of internet was hurting the Covid-19 response.

The Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act continued to provide effective immunity from prosecution to security forces, even for serious human rights abuses. In July, security forces killed three people in Shopian district, claiming they were militants. However, in August, their families, who identified them from photographs of the killings circulated on social media, said they were laborers. In September, the army said that its inquiry had found prima facie evidence that its troops exceeded powers under the AFSPA and it would take disciplinary proceedings against those “answerable.”

The security forces also continued to use shotguns firing metal pellets to disperse crowds, despite evidence that they are inherently inaccurate and cause injuries indiscriminately, including to bystanders, violating India’s international obligations.

Impunity for Security Forces

In the early weeks of the nationwide lockdown announced in March to contain Covid-19, in several states, police beat people who violated the lockdown, including those trying to get essential supplies. In West Bengal, police allegedly beat a 32-year-old man to death after he stepped out of his home to get milk. A video from Uttar Pradesh showed police forcing migrant workers, who were trying to walk home, to hop on the street to humiliate them. Police in several states also arbitrarily punished people or publicly shamed them for breaking the lockdown.

New cases of torture in police custody and extrajudicial killings highlighted continued lack of accountability for police abuses and failure to enforce police reforms. For the first 10 months, until October, the National Human Rights Commission reported 77 deaths in police custody, 1,338 deaths in judicial custody, and 62 alleged extrajudicial killings.

In June, a father and son died in police custody in Tamil Nadu state after being detained for allegedly violating Covid-19 lockdown rules. In September, the Central Bureau of Investigation, which was asked to investigate the deaths following nationwide outrage, charged nine policemen with murder and destruction of evidence.

In July, Uttar Pradesh police killed a suspect Vikas Dubey, saying he was trying to escape police custody, making him the 119th person to be killed in an alleged extrajudicial killing since the BJP government in Uttar Pradesh led by Ajay Bisht, who uses the title Yogi Adityanath, took office in March 2017. In September, the Uttar Pradesh government announced it would set up a special police force that would be empowered to search and arrest without warrant, raising further concerns about police abuse.

Dalits, Tribal Groups, and Religious Minorities

At least 53 people were killed in communal violence that broke out in Delhi in February. Over 200 were injured, properties destroyed, and communities displaced in targeted attacks by Hindu mobs. While a policeman and some Hindus were also killed, the majority of victims were Muslim. The attacks came after weeks of peaceful protests against the Indian government’s discriminatory citizenship policies.

Violence broke out soon after a local BJP politician, Kapil Mishra, demanded that the police clear the roads of protesters. Tensions had been building for weeks, with BJP leaders openly advocating violence against the protesters, whom some called “traitors” to be shot. Witness accounts and video evidence showed police complicity in the violence. A July report by the Delhi Minorities Commission said the violence in Delhi was “planned and targeted,” and found that the police were filing cases against Muslim victims for the violence, but not taking action against the BJP leaders who incited it.

In Uttar Pradesh, authorities continued to use allegations of cow slaughter to target Muslims. By August, the Uttar Pradesh government had arrested 4,000 people over allegations of cow slaughter under the law preventing it, and also used the draconian National Security Act against 76 people accused of cow slaughter. The NSA allows for detention for up to a year without filing charges.

Anti-Muslim rhetoric surged following the outbreak of Covid-19. In March, after Indian authorities announced that they found a large number of Covid-19 positive cases among Muslims who had attended a mass religious congregation in Delhi, some BJP leaders called the meeting a “Talibani crime” and “CoronaTerrorism.” Some pro-government media had screamed “CoronaJihad” and social media platforms were flooded by calls for social and economic boycotts of Muslims. There were also numerous physical attacks on Muslims, including volunteers distributing relief material, amid falsehoods accusing them of spreading the virus deliberately.

According to 2019 government data, crimes against Dalits increased by 7 percent. This, Dalit rights activists said, was in part as backlash by members of dominant castes against any efforts toward upward mobility or what they might perceive as a challenge to caste hierarchy. In August, 40 Dalit families in Odisha were socially boycotted when a 15-year-old girl plucked flowers from the backyard of a dominant caste family. In July, a Dalit man was stripped and beaten along with his family members in Karnataka for allegedly touching the motorcycle of a dominant caste man. In February, a Dalit man was beaten to death by members of dominant caste in Tamil Nadu for defecating in their field. In September, a Dalit lawyer was killed over his social media posts critical of Brahminism.

In August, several United Nations experts raised concerns over the government’s proposed revision to the environmental impact assessment process that exempts several large industries and projects from public consultation and allows post-facto clearance for projects that began without obtaining the required permissions. Environmental activists worry that diluting the provisions for public consultation and allowing post-facto clearances would undermine the rights of tribal communities, already facing a violation of rights due to the illegalities in forest clearances.

Civil Society and Freedom of Association

Indian authorities brought politically motivated cases, including under draconian sedition and terrorism laws, against human rights defenders, student activists, academics, opposition leaders, and critics, blaming them for the communal violence in February in Delhi as well as caste-based violence in Bhima Koregaon in Maharashtra state in January 2018. In both cases, BJP supporters were implicated in the violence. Police investigations in these cases were biased and aimed at silencing dissent and deterring future protests against government policies.

In September, the parliament passed amendments to the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA), the foreign funding law already used to harass outspoken rights groups. The amendments added onerous governmental oversight, additional regulations and certification processes, and operational requirements, which would adversely affect civil society groups, and effectively restrict access to foreign funding for small nongovernmental organizations. In September, Amnesty International was forced to suspend its India operations after the government froze the organization’s bank accounts, accusing it of violating laws related to foreign funding. Amnesty said it was a “reprisal” for its work and that the government’s actions were the latest in “the incessant witch-hunt of human rights organizations.”

Freedom of Expression and Privacy

Several journalists faced criminal cases, arrest, threat, or even physical assault by mobs or police for reporting on Covid-19. In many cases, they were independent journalists working in rural India, targeted for their criticism of the government’s handling of the pandemic.

Meanwhile, authorities continued to use sedition and laws related to national security against journalists. In September, journalist Rajeev Sharma was arrested under the Official Secrets Act for allegedly selling sensitive information to Chinese officials. The Press Club of India condemned the arrest, pointing to the police’s “dubious” past record of arresting journalists under the law without basis. In August, Uttar Pradesh authorities arrested journalist Prashant Kanojia over a post on Twitter, accusing him of disrupting communal harmony. Kanojia was also arrested last year over social media posts critical of the state’s chief minister but was granted bail.

In August, the Supreme Court convicted prominent lawyer Prashant Bhushan for criminal contempt of court for two social media posts, prompting widespread condemnation from former judges, retired bureaucrats, and lawyers who called it a “disproportionate response” that would have a “chilling effect” on people expressing critical views of the judiciary.

India continued to lead with the largest number of internet shutdowns globally as authorities resorted to blanket shutdowns either to prevent social unrest or to respond to an ongoing law and order problem. By early November, there were 71 shutdowns, out of which 57 were in Jammu and Kashmir, according to Software Freedom Law Centre.

Women’s Rights

Cases of domestic violence rose during the lockdown, as witnessed in many countries globally. In March, authorities executed the four men convicted for the gang-rape and murder of Jyoti Singh Pandey in 2012 in Delhi, even as there was a 7.9 percent increase in rape cases registered in 2019 over the previous year. Calls for the death penalty also failed to address systemic barriers to justice for survivors of sexual violence in India, including stigma, fear of retaliation, hostile or dismissive police response, and a lack of access to adequate legal and health support services.

In September, a 19-year-old Dalit woman died after being gang-raped and tortured allegedly by four men of dominant caste in a village in Uttar Pradesh. The authorities’ response highlighted how women from marginalized communities face even greater institutional barriers. State authorities cremated the victim’s body without the family’s consent and denied the woman had been raped, despite her dying declaration—apparently to shield the accused belonging to a dominant caste. The state government claimed that protests against the rape and killing were part of an “international conspiracy” and arrested a journalist and three political activists under terrorism and sedition laws, and also filed cases against some protesters for alleged criminal conspiracy.

Sexual harassment at work remains an entrenched problem. The government has failed to properly implement the 2013 Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Law, including ensuring the creation and proper functioning of complaints committees for women in the informal sector.

Children’s Rights during Covid-19 Pandemic

Schools remained closed from March onwards and were still closed at time of writing in most of the country, affecting more than 280 million students and threatening to reverse the progress made in access to education for the poor, especially those who attended government schools. In most states, government schools did not deliver education during the lockdown, putting children from marginalized communities such as Dalit, tribal, and Muslims at greater risk of dropping out, and being pushed into child labor and early marriage. Girls were even more vulnerable.

While many private schools offered online classes, only 24 percent of Indian households had access to the internet because of a large urban-rural and gender divide, widening the learning gap across high, middle, and low-income families, according to an August UNICEF report.

Millions of children in India, particularly those from Dalit and tribal communities, were also at risk of malnutrition and illness during the pandemic because the government failed to adequately ensure the provision of meals, health care, and immunizations that many marginalized children rely on from the government schools and anganwadi centers, which were closed in order to stop the spread of Covid-19.

Disability Rights

For persons with disabilities, the Covid-19 lockdown brought particular challenges, including access to medical care and essential supplies, and exercising social distancing, especially for those who receive personal support for tasks of daily living.

In March, the central government introduced guidelines for protection and safety for persons with disabilities during Covid-19. These included ensuring access to information such as in braille, sign language, easy-to-read formats; exempting support people from lockdown restrictions; exempting employees with certain disabilities from essential services work; and training emergency service providers on disability rights and treating persons with disabilities. However, activists said the guidelines were poorly implemented by most state governments, remaining mostly on paper.

Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity

In September, a petition in the Delhi High Court sought the right of same-sex couples to get married under the Hindu Marriage Act. The matter was pending at time of writing.

In July, the government published the draft Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Rules, 2020, seeking comments from civil society. But rights groups called on the authorities to halt the process of finalizing rules for a law, passed last year, which failed to provide full protection and recognition to transgender people. The law is unclear on a transgender person’s right to self-identify, which India’s Supreme Court recognized in a landmark judgment in 2014. Its provisions are also contrary to international standards for legal gender recognition.

Key International Actors

The United States government said little about India’s human rights record, including during President Donald Trump’s visit to India in February, but several members of the US Congress continued to publicly voice concerns.

In September, following the Turkish president’s critical remarks on Kashmir at the United Nations General Assembly, the Indian government called it “gross interference” in India's internal affairs and “completely unacceptable.”

The European Union, working to strengthen ties with India and revamp negotiations for a bilateral free trade agreement, failed to publicly raise concerns on India’s deteriorating human rights record. In July, the EU and India reiterated their commitment to human rights and pledged to reinstate their local human rights dialogue.

In February, the European Parliament negotiated and tabled an urgency resolution on India’s Citizenship Amendment Act, but postponed its adoption indefinitely. In May and October, the chair of the European Parliament’s Subcommittee on Human Rights raised concerns over “rule of law deterioration” in India, including arrest of human rights defenders, journalists, and peaceful critics.

In April, the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation criticized the “unrelenting vicious Islamophobic campaign in India maligning Muslims for spread of Covid-19.” The World Health Organization also cautioned against profiling Covid-19 cases “on the basis of racial, religious and ethnic lines.”

The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet voiced concerns over human rights violations in Jammu and Kashmir. In June, UN experts urged the Indian government to immediately release human rights defenders arrested for protesting against citizenship policies, saying the arrests seemed “clearly designed to send a chilling message to India’s vibrant civil society that criticism of government policies will not be tolerated.” In October, Bachelet also raised concerns over arrests of activists and use of vaguely defined laws to “punish NGOs for human rights reporting and advocacy that the authorities perceive as critical in nature.”

Foreign Policy

Hostilities with China escalated with thousands of Indian and Chinese troops at a standoff in the Ladakh border region since May. In June, Indian army officials reported clashes that resulted in 20 deaths. In September, shots were fired in the air along the Line of Actual Control, making it the first acknowledged use of firearms between the two armies in over 40 years. Both countries accused each other’s soldiers of being responsible. In response to escalating tensions, the Indian government banned over 200 Chinese-linked mobile applications, citing national security concerns.

In August, China called for a discussion on Kashmir at the UN Security Council. India and Pakistan traded allegations and counter allegations at the UN General Assembly in September over Kashmir and persecution of religious minorities.

India did not raise rights protections publicly during bilateral engagement with other neighbors including Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Afghanistan. India’s relations with Nepal strained over the year. In June, Nepal’s parliament approved a revised map of the country, incorporating three areas disputed with India. Nepal’s move came in response to India building a road through one the disputed areas and a revised map put out by India in November 2019, showing the disputed regions as belonging to India. In September, India and Sri Lanka held its first virtual bilateral summit after Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa took office, and the Indian government pressed the Sri Lankan government to “address the aspirations of the Tamil people for equality, justice, peace and respect within a united Sri Lanka, including by carrying forward the process of reconciliation.”

India was due to join the UN Security Council as a non-permanent member in January 2021.

Protecting Rights, Saving Lives

Human Rights Watch defends the rights of people in close to 100 countries worldwide, spotlighting abuses and bringing perpetrators to justice

Human Rights: Case Studies

• For Faculty
• Electronic Reserves (ARES)
• Human Rights at Fordham
• Social Work Profession
• Search Terms
• Older People
• Juvenile Justice
• Labor/Business
• Public Health
• Trafficking
• Disabilities
• Race and Ethnicity
• Civil Rights Movement
• UN Documents
• International

Case Studies

• Web Resources
• Library Help This link opens in a new window
• Access Issues
• Anti-Racism: Fordham Initiatives
• Library Resources in Anti-Racism
• Racism/Antiracism: Some new Books

Experiential Exercises

The sites on this page are recommended by Prof. T. Maschi.

--United Nations. (1994).  Human rights and social work: A manual for schools of social work and the social work profession.  Geneva: United Nations Centre for Human Rights. Retrieved from http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/training1en.pdf  (CASE STUDY VIGNETTES ON PAGE 48 IN THE APPENDIX).

--Reichert, E. (2007). Understanding human rights: An exercise book.  Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 2006. (END OF CHAPTER EXERCISES). Call number: HV41.R435 2006 (LC WC)  

--Wronka, J. (2008). Human rights and social justice: Social action and service for the helping and health professions.  Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, 2008. (END OF CHAPTER DISCUSSION QUESTIONS AND EXERCISES). Call number: HV41.W76 2008 (RH LC WC)

• Community Resources - inSocialWork Podcast Series Hear episode 41 by Dr. Elisabeth Reichert: Social Work and Human Rights. From the University of Buffalo School of Social Work
• inSocialWork - The Podcast Series of the University at Buffalo School of Social Work By the University at Buffalo School of Social Work
• Human Rights Case Studies From the Equality and Human Rights Commission, UK
• Case Studies Twelve case studies from the Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC)

General Media Sites

• The Leadership Conference - The Nation's Premier Civil & Human Rights Coalition Has videos
• National Public Radio

Reference & Instruction Department

Reference & Instruction Department Fordham University Libraries Walsh Library   ♦  Rose Hill Campus  ♦  718-817-3586    Quinn Library   ♦  Lincoln Center Campus  ♦  212-636-6050    Fordham Westchester Library   ♦  Fordham Westchester Campus  ♦  914-367-3061  [email protected]   ♦   text 71-TXTX-1284  ♦  Ask a Librarian (Chat)

• << Previous: Human Rights/Social Justice Links
• Next: Web Resources >>
• Last Updated: May 1, 2024 11:13 AM
• URL: https://fordham.libguides.com/HumanRights

• Business User
• IT Professional
• Microsoft 365
• Microsoft Copilot
• Microsoft Copilot for Microsoft 365
• Microsoft Copilot for Sales
• Microsoft Copilot for Small and Medium Business
• Microsoft Adoption Score
• Microsoft Dynamics 365
• Microsoft Graph
• Microsoft Lists
• Microsoft Loop
• Microsoft Mesh
• Microsoft Planner
• Microsoft Power Platform
• Microsoft Search
• Classic Microsoft Teams
• New Microsoft Teams
• Microsoft Teams Premium
• Microsoft Teams Phone
• Microsoft Security
• Microsoft Syntex
• Microsoft Viva
• Outlook mobile
• SharePoint Premium
• Champion Management Platform
• Extensibility Look Book Gallery
• Microsoft 365 Archive
• Microsoft 365 Backup
• Microsoft 365 Learning Pathways
• Microsoft Intelligent Document Processing
• Microsoft Teams App Templates
• New Employee Onboarding Solution Accelerator
• Partner Solution Gallery
• Sample Solution Gallery
• SharePoint eSignature
• SharePoint look book
• Accessibility
• Adoption guides
• Azure Adoption Framework
• Case Studies
• Employee experience
• FastTrack for Microsoft 365
• Frontline workers
• Guidance for virtual events
• How Microsoft does IT
• Leading in the era of AI
• Microsoft 365 Roadmap
• Meetings, webinars, and town halls in Microsoft Teams
• Microsoft Copilot resources for education
• Modern Collaboration Architecture (MOCA)
• Podcasts & Shows
• Remote learning in education
• Skype for Business to Microsoft Teams upgrade
• Streamline end user training
• AI learning hub
• Become a Service Adoption Specialist
• Coffee in the Cloud tutorials
• Developer training
• End user training
• IT Pro training
• Microsoft 365 Champion Program
• Microsoft Learn
• Modern Work Customer Hub (Microsoft Copilot customer training)
• Office Quick Start guides
• Community Events
• Community Tenant
• Global Community Initiative
• Microsoft Community Hub
• Student Ambassador Community
• Release notes

Home / Case Studies / Australian Human Rights Commission

AHRC implements a fully automated EDRMS on SharePoint using AI and machine learning

Published on October 8, 2021

Australian Human Rights Commission

Recordpoint.

RecordPoint is a global leader and developer of cloud-based information management and compliance services. The business helps regulated companies and government agencies reduce risk, increase operational efficiency, and drive collaboration.

The Australian Human Rights Commission (the Commission) is Australia’s national human rights institution, an independent statutory organization in the Attorney-General’s portfolio that promotes and protects human rights. Although a small agency, AHRC has a reputation for early strategic adoption of new technologies. In recent years AHRC has been a leader in government with their migration to Microsoft Office 365 and Azure.  

According to the National Archives of Australia (NAA), the Commission is the current thought leader of records management in the Australian Government. Through a corporate partnership with RecordPoint, the Commission implemented an electronic document and records management system (EDRMS) on SharePoint with RecordPoint Records365, utilizing RecordPoint’s AI and machine learning technologies to classify records without the need for staff input.  

Prior to this new EDRMS solution, in production since February 2019, the Commission was drowning in a sea of duplicates, tangled in nested folders and perplexed by lost documents. Funding shortfalls and other challenges saw the Commission unable to implement an EDRMS solution that was viable.  

Researching options, the Commission headed by Ron McLay, Chief Information Officer and Ryan McConville, Information Manager, incorporated the Department of Finance’s study into the failings of the traditional EDRMS. In particular, the report suggested that records management should be automated, rather than a being a manual task for public servants. Inspired by the report, the Commission set out to implement a fully automated EDRMS, using artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning. This would form the basis of RADICAL – Record And Document Innovation & Capture – Artificial Learning.  

An EDRMS implementation with AI addresses key problems faced in running an effective EDRMS. AI reduces the scope for human error, while increasing the volume, accuracy and consistency of records classification. The simple user interface has driven high user uptake and is seen by staff as a useful tool rather than a burden.  

The Commission avoided customization and add-ons for RecordPoint and SharePoint, focusing on configuration instead. A common problem agencies have experienced is in the customization and use of third-party add-ins to suit existing or outdated business processes. This often resulted in systems that were difficult to use, inefficient and unreliable, and hard to upgrade with user uptake suffering accordingly.  

Harnessing the native functionality of RecordPoint and SharePoint translated to improved business processes. The Commission also incorporated simple navigation for easy browsing of records, supported by a powerful search feature in Records365. The RADICAL solution has been in production since February 2019 and is currently in staging for deployment across the organization  

The Commission’s approach was ‘configuration over customization’ as recommended by the DTA, focused on human-centered design. Staff were consulted extensively on current needs and pain points. When possible, native Records365 and SharePoint functionality was preserved, limiting the need for end user training and burdensome change management.  

When planning RADICAL, a key goal was to remove records management decisions from staff and allow them to focus on their core work. RADICAL needed to provide ‘transparent records management’ and limit the potential for inaccurate or inconsistent classification.  

Traditionally, the classification process has been performed manually by records officers. The manual element of classification can be time consuming, can lead to inaccuracy and can be disruptive to staff. Previous methodologies to automate records classification uses rules trees that classify records based on their metadata and saved location. However, rules trees need to be built and maintained by experienced records officers and rely on end users to apply accurate metadata and save to specific locations.  

Leveraging AI in this process solves many of these problems by combining a minimal rules tree with a machine learning model. If a record cannot be categorized by a rule, the machine learning model classifies the record based on its contents. This system eliminates the need to maintain complex rules trees, the reliance on metadata and record location.  

The RADICAL project team worked with RecordPoint’s AI developers to create a statistical model that can classify records against AFDA Express and the Commission’s agency-specific records disposal authority.  

The statistical model is developed by taking a set of records that have been manually classified and applying Natural Language Processing techniques to normalize the document content into vectors. The model is then trained using algorithms.  

After an initial training period, the RADICAL statistical model can categorize individual records with an accuracy of 80%. The Commission expects this accuracy will increase over time. RADICAL also re-categorizes records each time they are edited, ensuring the classification is always current.  

Although the machine learning model will initially work in conjunction with a rules tree, as the accuracy of the model increases the rules will be gradually removed and the Commission will rely solely on machine learning to manage their corporate records.  

The implementation phase involved:  

• performing a detailed analysis of existing systems and record holdings  
• developing a new information governance framework and agency-specific records disposal authority  
• developing and implementing a records migration strategy  
• extensive collaboration and testing with the RecordPoint AI developers  
• developing and testing of the SharePoint platform that Records365 manages  
• working with a specialist change management facilitator  
• training end users and providing ongoing support on go live  
• implementing an agreed security model  
• gaining agency-wide approval for the system including the business rules and for use of the machine learning algorithms  
• training the machine learning algorithms  
• implementing and rolling out the system  

As most Australian Government agencies share the same records management requirements, the Commission feels that the machine learning model provided by RecordPoint and used by RADICAL is a ‘genuine game-changer’ and will allow other agencies to experience equivalent ‘gains in efficiency, productivity and cost reductions.’ The Commission sees themselves as trailblazers in government for the use of AI in records management and are excited to share their experiences as the current thought leaders of Australian Government records management.  

RADICAL provides multiple, tangible benefits to the Commission such as:  

• automated records management that is accurate, consistent and compliant  
• compliance with DC2020  
• document versioning, which reduces duplication  
• enhanced collaboration and sharing  
• streamlined handling of Freedom of Information (FOI) requests  
• Power BI reports for senior executives  
• reduction in staff time spent on records management  
• effective and efficient records search and retrieval  
• real-time video transcription  
• automated image cataloguing  

RADICAL has had a positive impact on the Commission and its stakeholders by:  

• delivering upon the objective of ‘transparent records management’  
• increasing the accuracy and compliance of information management practices by reducing the scope for human error  
• reducing the time and costs associated with responding to FOI requests through improved search and retrieval  
• gradually reducing physical storage costs, currently averaging $17,000AUD per annum  
• reducing digital storage costs  
• increasing collaboration between Commission business units through shared document libraries and the establishment of an ‘open by default’ information access policy, where access to records is restricted only to protect personal privacy or sensitive information  
• improving business processes through electronic workflows, document versioning and automated metadata tagging  
• minimizing the impact of potential data breaches through regular scheduled records disposal  

Initial estimates by the Commission suggest that staff using RADICAL are seeing at least a 5% increase in productivity. Additionally, the accuracy of capture and classification by the algorithms is improving, and by estimates ‘it already exceeds the accuracy of our manual classification.’  

Lastly, the Commission showcases that a technologically advanced solution can be implemented without significant costs. ‘We estimate that a traditional EDRMS would have cost the Commission 3 or 4 times as much as RADICAL.’  

Share this page

•  Share on Microsoft Teams
• Share on Facebook
• Share on LinkedIn

• Skip to main content

Important Cases

: 1. Abuse of legal system in trafficking of girls; Commission calls for report from Delhi Police Commissioner The Commission has taken suo-motu cognizance of a complaint filed by the NGO, International Law Affiliates on the plight of poor girls in Nepal and India being trafficked and forced into prostitution in various red light areas. The complainant, while requesting the Commission to consider taking action, had forwarded a copy of his petition addressed to the Chief Justice of India dated 27 December 2004 as well as a news article captioned "The Girl Breakers of Delhi" published in a national daily on 19 December 2004. The news article is a gory narration of trafficking and exploitation of girls belonging to lower strata of the community. It makes a reference to the collusion between the pimps, brothel owners and police officials to force poor gullible girls into the prostitution racket. As an example the news article highlighted one of the modus operandi as :- "The farce follows set stages: a trumped-up case is registered against these minor girls falsely alleging that they were trying to solicit clients in a public place. The minor girls are then arrested and kept in lock-up while the police prepare a challan wherein the minor girls age is entered as 21. This entry is apparently sufficient to transform overnight the minor girl into an adult for all subsequent court proceedings. After this, these minor girls are produced before a magistrate and released on bail." The Commission observed that the contents of the article, if true, portray a dismal picture of exploitation and trafficking of girls by the abuse of legal system in connivance with the authorities who are supposed to provide protection against such exploitation. The article points towards an organized racket in trafficking of girls and raises a serious human rights issue, which needs to be addressed with all seriousness. It has directed that a copy of the petition along with a copy of the news article referred to above be forwarded to the Commissioner of Police, Delhi with a request to inquire into the matter and submit his report within four weeks. 2. Rape of a visually impaired girl at Nadia; Commission asks for comments from the West Bengal Government Taking suo-motu cognizance of a news item captioned "Disabled Girl raped at home" which appeared in a national daily dated 17 December 2004, the Commission has asked the Director General of Police, Kolkata, West Bengal to look into the allegation contained in the news story and submit his comments within two weeks. The newspaper had published a news story on 17 December 2004 wherein it was reported that a 19-year-old visually impaired girl had been allegedly raped at her home by two miscreants in Dhorandaha village, Karimpur, Nadia, West Bengal in the absence of her parents. The report further stated that both the miscreants allegedly have political clout and a reputation in the locality as musclemen. It also stated that the miscreants have threatened the victim not to report the incident to the police. The mother of the victim was initially scared to file a complaint but at the instance of village elders she lodged an FIR, it said. Earlier the duo had allegedly raped women but no complaint was lodged against them. 3. Commission asks comments from Karnataka Government on the death of a boy in Observation Home Taking suo-motu cognizance of a news item captioned "Observation Home under scanner/Boy found dead in Observation Home" which appeared in a national daily dated 14 December 2004, the Commission has asked the Chief Secretary, Government of Karnataka, to look into the allegations contained in it and submit his comments within two weeks. The newspaper had reported that 14-year-old Santosh, an inmate of Observation Home, Madivala, Bangalore, Karnataka, was found hanging by a rope from the ceiling of the toilet on 13 December 2004. According to the report, the deceased was put in the Observation Home on charges of theft and committed suicide. It also stated that 35 boys lodged in the Observation Home were reportedly shocked and no longer wanted to stay in the premises. The report further disclosed that Ms. Brinda Adiga of Makkala Sahaya Vani, the children's help line charged the staff in the Observation Home as being not skilled enough to handle juveniles. No intimation about the death in the Observation Home has so far been received in the Commission from the authorities concerned. The Commission observed that if the contents of the report are true, the issue raised in it causes serious concern about the protection of human rights of juveniles lodged in the Observation Homes in Karnataka.

Understanding Human Rights In Policing: An Online Course For Human Rights Activists and Practitioner

Have you ever wondered about the critical role of police during protests? Are you curious about the rules governing the use of force and firearms by police officials? Interested in understanding under what circumstances police may carry out an arrest? Would you like to understand the impact of racial and other forms of discrimination on policing?  

We are thrilled to announce that from 8 May, you can enrol in a course on the Amnesty Human Rights Academy that addresses exactly these topics: Police and Human Rights.   

From the killing of George Floyd in the United States, the extrajudicial executions of Afro-Brazilians living in Brazil’s favelas, to the repression of protesters in Hong Kong and the unlawful use of force during protests in Thailand, Peru and worldwide, you will look at real-life examples of policing and human rights.

Police Have a Duty to Respect and Protect Human Rights  

Around the world, the misuse of police powers often leads to devastating outcomes. Particularly in the context of protests , there are almost daily reports of restrictions imposed on demonstrations, unlawful use of force, the misuse of less lethal weapons, excessive surveillance, and arbitrary arrests and detention by the police. Police have powers, but they also have the duty to respect and protect human rights. There are strict rules to determine how much force can be used and when.  

All too often, police officials who kill or injure people after using force unlawfully are not brought to justice.  That’s why it’s so important to know what the police are and are not allowed to do. The United Nations Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials (BPUFF) is the key international legal instrument that deals with the police’s use of force. According to these principles, police officers may only use lethal force as a last resort when such means are strictly necessary to protect themselves or others from the imminent threat of death or serious injury, and only when other options for de-escalation are insufficient. 

This course will allow you to learn about the international and regional frameworks that should govern police actions. It will provide you with knowledge and understanding to advocate for your rights and challenge policies and practices that do not comply with human rights. 

Policing is Often Impacted by Discrimination  

People from racialised communities or marginalised groups often face disproportionate identity checks, searches, and unlawful arrests by the police. Discriminated against groups are often overpoliced, with the police excessively enforcing vaguely worded provisions related to the disturbance of public order or deliberately targeting these groups for alleged drug offences and petty crimes.  

To demonstrate how deeply ingrained discrimination is in law enforcement and justice systems around the world we have integrated discrimination across the course by including a lesson specifically on discrimination in each module The final module looks at racism and other forms of discrimination in more detail, highlighting how systemic factors contribute to discriminatory practices within policing. Using an intersectional lens, you will get a basic understanding of different forms of discrimination in policing such as disproportionate arrests, torture, unlawful use of force during protests and at the border, racial profiling, and the discriminatory use of new technologies.   

  The Importance of Accountability  

No one is above the law –including those charged with upholding it. International human rights law requires all governments to ensure an effective and impartial investigation of all complaints against police officials, and to impose disciplinary or criminal sanctions where appropriate. 

But Amnesty has documented in many countries how police officers who unlawfully kill or injure people frequently get away with it. In some cases, police and security forces threaten the judiciary, witnesses or survivors, pressuring them to drop charges. In other cases, laws are passed to give police immunity or otherwise obstruct justice, even when they act against the law. Sometimes a country’s president or head of the police actually orders police forces to kill anyone they believe to be a criminal suspect. When people in positions of power sanction murder and promise immunity, accountability of the police is fundamentally undermined. 

In this course you will learn how crucial accountability of the police is to prevent human rights violations. If police officers commit crimes without punishment or consequences, they are more likely to break the law, rules and regulations again, contributing to a climate of impunity. Effective accountability is essential to ensure lawful and human rights-compliant policing. 

What Else You Need to Know About Amnesty’s Police and Human Rights Course

You can learn more about Amnesty’s new free course on Police and Human Rights , developed by experts in the field at Amnesty International and accessibly designed for anyone who is interested in police and human rights issues. 

There are nine self-learning modules, which you can follow at your own pace. Each will take approximately an hour to complete. You can take a single module or complete the entire course based on your interests. Through quizzes, Amnesty’s research, videos, and self-directed learning materials, you will learn about a wide range of topics related to human rights-compliant policing. Each module offers additional materials for those interested in deeper learning.    

Using Amnesty’s research, you will study critical issues like the policing of protests, arrest and detention, and the obligation to facilitate protests. You will learn about the various lethal and less lethal weapons and the rules around the lawful use of these weapons and how to hold police accountable for human rights violations.  

Whether you’re a human rights activist, researcher, academic, work in the judiciary sector or are simply curious about these critical topics, these modules will equip you with essential knowledge and insights. Upon completion of the whole course, participants are granted a certificate. 

T he course is now available for free in English on Amnesty’s Human Rights Academy.   

We hope you will enjoy your learning experience and look forward to hearing your feedback! 

Quick Links

• RESOURCE CENTER
• MEMBER LOGIN

External Links

• AAAS Communities
• SCIENCE CAREERS
• SCIENCE FAMILY OF JOURNALS
• More AAAS Sites

AAAS Center for Scientific Responsibility and Justice

The AAAS Center for Scientific Responsibility and Justice empowers scientists and engineers to pursue justice by advancing trustworthy science – science that is conducted and communicated responsibly, upholding the values of scientific freedom and human rights, including the right of everyone to enjoy the benefits of scientific progress. Previously known as the Scientific Responsibility, Human Rights and Law program, the Center provides support for scientists to help them apply the values of trustworthy science in their daily work; works to increase trust in science with communities that have not benefitted from scientific progress; and develops and sustains infrastructures and institutions that promote, protect, and defend scientific freedom and responsibility. To realize a world where we can achieve scientific excellence responsibly, ethically and inclusively to broaden our impact on society and uphold the rights and dignity of everyone, the Center aims to build an ecosystem where trustworthy science can thrive.

SciTech and Human Rights FutureGen Scholars

Human Rights, Ethics, and the Importance of Evidence Based Research

Scientific Evidence and the Courts  

Science, Technology and Human Rights Conference 2023  

AAAS Science and Human Rights Coalition Names FutureGen Scholars  

Introducing the Decision Tree for the Responsible Application Artificial Intelligence  

2022-23 SciTech and Human Rights FutureGen Scholars to Pursue Projects on DEI, Disability and DNA

The AAAS Science and Human Rights Coalition has announced the 2022-23 SciTech and Human Rights FutureGen Scholars, an initiative that supports undergraduate and graduate students as they pursue a project on their campus or local community at the intersection of science, technology and human rights.

AAAS Statement on Scientific Freedom & Responsibility

Timely resources.

Geospatial Evidence in International Human Rights Litigation: Technical and Legal Considerations

Location-Based Data in Crisis Situations: Principles and Guidelines

Covid-19 resources.

Coronavirus News and Resources from AAAS and Science

COVID-19 and Human Rights Resources

Featured reports, publications and videos.

New Report on US Scientific Enterprise & UNESCO Recommendation

Responsible AI Series

In the news.

Artificial Intelligence: A Vital Tool in the Pandemic

AAAS Project to Promote Socially Responsible Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare Kicks Off with Public Opinion Work

Center for scientific responsibility and justice.

• Human Rights
• Artificial Intelligence
• Get Involved

Related Programs

• Office of Science, Policy and Society Programs

Related Focus Areas

• Human Rights, Law & Ethics

SCAM ALERT: We will never contact you requesting money. Learn more.

A bad business - case studies.

Back to Table of Contents

A Bad Business (Review of sexual harassment in employment complaints 2002)

In this section you can access:

Media Pack Index | Media Release | Launch Speech by Pru Goward | Speech by Nareen Young | Case Studies Fact Sheets: Key Findings | The Complaints Process | Legal Definition of Sexual Harassment | Cost to Employers

Case Studies

Sexual harassment in employment complaints.

(All names have been changed to protect the parties' privacy. These case studies, while additional to the information provided in A Bad Business: Review of Sexual Harassment in Employment Complaints 2002 , are summaries of actual allegations made by complainants in nine of the complaint files reviewed.)

1. The staff Christmas party

Two months after Amy started work as a short-term contract delivery person, she attended the staff Christmas party at a local hotel. She alleges on arriving at the hotel with her sister, a group of about 10 male co-workers wolf-whistled and made sexual remarks about Amy and her sister. Shortly afterwards, a co-worker, Evan, walked over to the table where Amy and her sister were sitting having a drink. He started to dance, and lifted his T-shirt, exposing his stomach and chest. He then allegedly proceeded to loosen his pants and turned around and bent over, exposing his bare backside directly in front of Amy and her sister. Later in the evening, while Amy was playing pool with another co-worker, Evan allegedly approached Amy from behind and pulled down her top, exposing her right breast. She claims she hit Evan over the head with her pool cue because she was frightened and embarrassed. After this incident, Mark, another co-worker, approached Amy and tried to wrench the pool cue from Amy’s hand. Amy claims she was also intimidated by Evan, because he was sitting across the room, staring at her.

Amy complained to her manager the following work day about these incidents, and her employer conducted an investigation into the complaint. Her allegations were substantiated. Evan was transferred to another work-site, while Mark was reprimanded. After making her complaint, Amy alleged that her co-workers treated her coldly and her contract was not renewed. Amy lodged a complaint with HREOC seeking financial compensation and the introduction of a more transparent sexual harassment complaint and discipline procedure. Amy’s employer settled her complaint privately for an undisclosed amount, prior to going to a conciliation conference.

2. Alleged harassment by the boss

Eleanor was 15 years old when she started working as a casual shop assistant in a suburban store after school and on weekends. Five months after starting work, Jeremy, the 32-year old owner and manager of the store allegedly asked Eleanor if she had a boyfriend and whether she had sex. He allegedly read pornographic magazines in front of Eleanor asking her whether she was ‘turned on’ by them. Eleanor claimed that Jeremy began to kiss and touch her on a regular basis. He allegedly told Eleanor of his sexual experiences, exposed his penis to her, started calling Eleanor on her mobile phone when she was at school, put his fingers into Eleanor’s vagina, asked her to suck his penis and masturbated in front of her. Eleanor claimed that Jeremy frequently tried to have sex with Eleanor in the store after closing time. Eleanor resigned from her employment once she was eligible for Youth Allowance.

Eleanor lodged a complaint with HREOC against Jeremy and the store alleging sexual harassment and sex discrimination.

The complaint settled at conciliation with Eleanor receiving $17,000 by way of damages, payable in two installments.

3. Alleged harassment by co-workers

Sue was employed as an advertising sales executive at a regional newspaper. On the evening of Sue’s birthday she joined co-workers at the local pub for a drink. At the pub, Wayne, a co-worker, allegedly approached Sue, and showed her a picture he had created. Sue claimed that the picture consisted of her head superimposed onto a pornographic image of a woman. This image had allegedly been circulating around Sue’s workplace for about a week before.

The next day, Sue lodged a complaint with the newspaper’s Sexual Harassment Officer and the General Manager. Sue claimed that management assured her that Wayne would be dismissed for his behaviour.

Three weeks later, upon returning from leave, Sue discovered that Wayne had not been dismissed at all; rather he had been required to take long service leave.

Sue claimed that she was taunted and ridiculed by Wayne’s friends. They allegedly criticized her work, berated her for other people’s mistakes and made sexual comments about her appearance and sexual ability. They allegedly called her a ”cry baby” who had gone “crying to the Boss” and who was unable to take a joke.

Unable to deal with this situation at work which Sue claims was making her unwell, she transferred to another job at a different location even though it meant a reduction in wages. However Sue was still required to have some contact with Wayne’s friends. Sue went on sick leave shortly thereafter. She claimed she was dismissed from her job while her employer claimed she resigned.

Sue lodged a complaint with HREOC alleging sexual harassment against the three co-workers responsible for the harassment and her employer. She sought compensation for the loss of income resulting from her dismissal and recompense for the hurt, humiliation and victimization she experienced.

The matter settled at a conciliation conference with the newspaper paying Sue damages to the sum of $5,000.

4. Alleged harassment by a co-worker

Shilpa was employed as a process worker in a large factory. A co-worker, Jim, allegedly began to make comments to Shilpa such as, “you look very sexy today” and “you wear very nice clothes – they make you look sexy”. Shilpa claimed that Jim would put his arms around her and try to share her chair when she was eating lunch in the lunch room. Jim allegedly started to persistently ask Shilpa out for dinner or lunch which she always refused. She claimed that Jim would deliberately brush his arm against Shilpa’s breasts when she was working on a machine near him and say things like “how do you and your husband ever have sex if you’re working the afternoon shift?” Jim allegedly then started touching Shilpa from behind, grabbing her bra strap and trying to undo it. Shilpa then claimed that Jim began grabbing her on her breasts, trying to pretend he had tripped and landed in that position.

Shilpa claimed that eventually Jim got the message that she was not interested in him. However Jim allegedly started to criticize Shilpa’s work and make her work on the most difficult machine constantly, rather than be rotated around the other machines like the other staff members.

Shilpa lodged a formal complaint with the production manager. As a result of Shilpa’s complaint, a formal performance review of all staff in the area was undertaken. However, Shilpa claimed that Jim was instrumental in carrying out the review. From this point onwards, Shilpa claimed that she was constantly called into Jim’s office for minor incidents that other staff members were not criticized for nor questioned about. Shortly thereafter Shilpa was given a verbal warning as to her work performance.

Due to the stress Shilpa claimed that she developed a mental condition that required medication. She was declared unfit to return to the workplace and was placed on workers’ compensation.

Shilpa lodged a complaint with HREOC alleging sexual harassment, sex discrimination and victimization. This matter did not settle at a conciliation conference and was terminated on the ground of no reasonable prospect of conciliation. Shilpa lodged an application with the Federal Court of Australia but the matter was discontinued.

5. Alleged harasser “from the old school and doesn’t know any better”

Tracey commenced working for a telecommunications company through an employment agency as an administrative officer. A co-worker, Sam, allegedly started to make innuendos and comments of a sexual nature including “I know what you need”, “are you wearing a G-string?” Tracey also claimed that Sam stared at her breasts, tried to hold her hand when he was passing her something, and invited Tracey to sit on his lap.

After almost 12 months of this behaviour, Tracey stated that she was suffering from stress headaches and hated going to work. She complained to the manager who responded by allegedly saying that Sam was “from the old school and doesn’t know any better” and to wait a few days or a week and see what happens. No action was taken by the telecommunications company.

Tracey lodged a complaint with HREOC alleging sexual harassment against Sam and the telecommunications company.

Prior to going to a conciliation conference, the parties decided to negotiate settlement privately. The terms of the final settlement remain undisclosed.

6. Alleged harassment by a customer

Bianca had recently moved to a country town. Bianca claimed that her new neighbour, David, helped her find a job as a casual bar attendant at the local boat club, of which David was a member. Within two weeks, Bianca was appointed part-time Assistant Manager. From the day Bianca commenced work, David allegedly started to make unwanted sexual comments to Bianca such as “you owe me big time for this girl, big time” and “come on show me your tits and that will be enough”. Other comments that Bianca claimed David made included “we want you to go in a wet t-shirt competition, you would win hands down”. On one occasion when Bianca was at work behind the bar, David allegedly kept repeating to Bianca and other patrons at the bar “you’re a lesbian aren’t you”. This continued for about two months. Bianca decided to make a complaint to the manager of the boat club. No action was taken.

Bianca requested a meeting with the board of the boating club. Instead of investigating Bianca’s complaint, Bianca claimed that the board members accused her of lying and demoted her to a casual. Bianca claims, due to the mental and emotional stress, she was unable to work.

The matter went to conciliation but the parties failed to reach a settlement. Bianca filed an application for hearing of her case in the Federal Magistrates Court, but the matter settled prior to hearing.

7. Work-related travel

Tammy was employed as a full-time receptionist/tour guide/shop assistant at a tourism facility. She accompanied the co-director of the small company that owned the tourism facility on a buying trip overseas. Upon arrival at the destination, Tammy claimed that Joshua, the co-director and her direct supervisor, had only booked one double room (with a double bed) for them to share. After Tammy complained, Joshua allegedly changed the booking to a twin room with two single beds but still expected Tammy to share the motel room with him. Tammy claimed that Joshua told her not to worry if she saw him naked as that was how he slept. He also allegedly said that Tammy should not worry because “it was only small”, while looking at his groin area.

After returning home, Tammy complained to Monica, the other co-director of the company and Joshua’s girlfriend. Monica allegedly apologized for Joshua’s behaviour and told Tammy that she would deal with it. Shortly thereafter, Tammy’s hours were reduced.

Tammy lodged a complaint with HREOC alleging sexual harassment and victimization. Her complaint was terminated on the ground of there being no reasonable prospect of the complaint settling via conciliation. Tammy made an application for hearing of her case by the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia but the case was discontinued.

8. No employment relationship

Melanie was employed as a delivery driver for a company that supplied vehicle spare parts. Upon delivering a consignment of spare parts to a customer of the company, Gary, an employee of the customer, allegedly lifted a long screwdriver up between Melanie’s legs all to the way to her crotch. On another occasion, Gary allegedly struck Melanie in the crotch with an airgun. Upon returning to her workplace, Melanie claimed that she reported the incidences to the acting manager. Melanie’s manager contacted Gary’s manager who allegedly apologized for Gary’s behaviour and advised that Gary would come and give Melanie a verbal apology. Melanie claimed that this did not occur.

Several days later, two of Melanie’s managers visited Gary’s workplace and spoke to Gary’s manager about the complaint. Gary’s manager allegedly said that Melanie flaunted her body in the workshop so she “asked for it”. Melanie claimed that Gary’s manager said that he would provide a written apology but this did not eventuate either.

Melanie lodged a complaint with HREOC alleging sexual harassment against Gary and Gary’s employer. The President of the Commission terminated the complaint on the ground that it was not unlawful as there was no employment relationship between Melanie and Gary, nor between Melanie and Gary’s employer.

9. No joking matter

Alice, a 51-year-old woman, worked as a temp. She was contracted out to perform administrative duties at a security company. Alice claimed that Geoffrey, a co-worker, was very friendly to her, stopping in the mornings to have lengthy conversations with her and compliment her on what she was wearing. A few days after Alice started work, she was in the lunchroom when Geoffrey allegedly walked behind Alice and rubbed her shoulders. Trying to fit in, Alice said that it felt good and that she could be bribed, joking as she was responsible for giving out the car parking stickers.

A week or so later Alice claimed that Geoffrey came to Alice’s office first thing in the morning when no one else was around and rubbed her shoulders again. Alice asked Geoffrey what he wanted but he didn’t answer. Geoffrey allegedly kissed Alice lightly on the head and started to walk out, leaving Alice feeling very uncomfortable. Alice said seriously “I think you’ve taken advantage of me” and Geoffrey allegedly answered “I don’t think anyone could take advantage of you”. Alice claimed that she blushed at this response, wondering if he meant that she was cheap or had encouraged him.

Alice claimed that in the weeks that followed, Geoffrey would often enter her office when no one else was around and walk around Alice’s desk to stand closely beside her. He would put his hand on her shoulder and lean over her. Geoffrey would also stare at Alice’s chest when he was speaking to her.

Alice spoke to Geoffrey’s supervisor, Max, about Geoffrey’s behaviour. When Alice suggested it was sexual harassment, Max allegedly laughed and loudly made jokes about sexual harassment about the office.

A month later, Alice’s contract was not renewed. Alice lodged a complaint with HREOC against Geoffrey, Max and the security company alleging sexual harassment and sex discrimination.

The matter settled at conciliation with the company agreeing to pay general damages in the sum of $4,750, and to provide a written employment reference. Geoffrey agreed to provide a private letter of apology.

<< Back || Next >>

Last updated: 12 November 2003