Twisting the knife: discrimination in the law

Of the many different variations that can occur in human sexual formation, transsexualism no doubt remains the least understood by the wider Australian community. As a consequence, the process of attaining human rights to legal status, privacy, dignity and freedom from discrimination for those who experience this unusual condition has been a slow and sometimes frustrating one. The article seeks to introduce the reader to some of the more recent developments in the international jurisprudence of transsexualism and the underlying medical evidence that has supported them. It also offers criticism of the belated attempt by the State of Victoria,  with the Births, Deaths & Marriages Registration (Amendment) Act 2004, to establish certain statutory rights in this regard. While the legislation was enacted with the stated and very laudable purpose of providing for the  correction of birth records on the Register of Births of those people with transsexualism who have altered their phenotypic sex by hormonal  medication and surgery, the article argues it has also served to remove other equally important rights already won and proposes that a final remedy will only be found, as on previous occasions, in the courts.

Discrimination as the touchstone of persecution in refugee law

The touchstone of refugee law is the concept of persecution. The concept is poorly defined. The courts have suggested that it includes several elements, including discrimination, systematic conduct, motivation and causation. In the context of distinguishing between prosecution and persecution, other criteria that have been employed include the notion of a law of general application’ and the legitimate and appropriate and adapted test. These concepts are often overlapping and some are superfluous. This paper proposes a new test for persecution. The best way forward to unify and inject coherency, consistency and certainty into this area of the law is to make discrimination the sole criterion of persecution. The (exhaustive) test for persecution that is proposed is as follows:  1. Does the law on its face impose an additional burden for a Convention reason? 2. If the answer is no, it is necessary to examine if the practical effect of the law is to impose an additional burden on people for a Convention reason either because the law selectively targets people for a Convention ground or disproportionately applies against people for a Convention ground? 3. If the answer to both questions is ‘no’, the law does not constitute persecution. 4. If the answer to question 1 or 2 is ‘yes’, then the law will constitute persecution unless there is a relevant basis for causing serious harm to people for a Convention reason.

'The witness who saw, /He left little doubt' : a comparative consideration of expert testimony in mental disability law cases in common and civil law systems

The question of how courts assess expert evidence - especially when mental disability is an issue - raises the corollary question of whether courts adequately evaluate the content of the expert testimony or whether judicial decision making may be influenced by teleology (cherry picking evidence), pretextuality (accepting experts who distort evidence to achieve socially desirable aims), and/or sanism (allowing prejudicial and stereotyped evidence). Such threats occur despite professional standards in forensic psychology and other mental health disciplines that require ethical expert testimony. The result is expert testimony that, in many instances, is at best incompetent and at worst biased. The paper details threats to competent expert testimony in a comparative law context - in both the common law (involuntary civil commitment laws and risk assessment criminal laws) and, more briefly, civil law. We conclude that teleology, pretextuality, and sanism have an impact upon judicial decision making in both the common law and civil law. Finally, we speculate as to whether the new United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities is likely to have any impact on practices in this area. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Visual discrimination and reproduction of movement by individuals with an intellectual disability

This study investigates the capacity of individuals with an intellectual disability to make accurate discriminations of computer-generated displays and also to reproduce the characteristics of those displays. The findings suggest that the learning of everyday motor skills in this population may be hampered by difficulties in visually perceiving important characteristics of the demonstration. Procedures, employed for teaching these skills to intellectually disabled, are being reassessed in the light of these findings.

Remedying discrimination : the limits of the law and the need for a systemic approach

Very few discrimination complaints reach the courts each year. As with other civil litigation, the reasons for this include the cost of pursuing litigation and, particularly for complainants, the risk of losing or receiving less than the complainant could have negotiated prior.

Drawing on interviews with lawyers and non-legal advocates in Victoria and an analysis of successful cases in three jurisdictions, this article examines the remedy the court is likely to award in a successful discrimination complaint and considers the effect of this on the eradication of discrimination in society. A comprehensive examination of the remedies awarded in successful discrimination complaints in Victoria over a three year period shows that courts are most likely to order compensation at modest amounts and complainants are not regularly awarded their costs. A comparison with Queensland and the federal system reveals a similar experience. Even in those jurisdictions where wider remedies are available, courts rarely take the opportunity to make broad orders which could affect other similarly situated individuals or deter would-be respondents.

While it is necessary to remedy the complainant’s experience, it is also necessary to address broader, systemic discrimination and a compensation award cannot do this. Remedying discrimination with compensation is primarily a problem because it is reactive. Compensation does not address other instances of discrimination in society or achieve systemic change nor does it encourage compliance because the respondent is not required to take anticipatory action to prevent another complaint.

Based on the interpretive principles and extensive remedies provided in South Africa’s recent anti-discrimination and a study of remedies ordered by the South African Equality Courts and the Irish Equality Tribunal, the article proposes reforms to Australia’s anti-discrimination legislation to enable courts to make wider orders which target other instances of discrimination in addition to remedying the complainant’s experience.

Discrimination against minorities and women in pensions and health, life, and disability insurance.

Includes bibliographical references.

Wages of interned merchant seamen, disability and other benefits to merchant seamen. Hearings before the Committee on the merchant marine and fisheries, House of representatives, Seventy-eighth Congress, second session, on H. R. 3262, a bill to amend section 2 (B) of Public law 17, Seventy-eighth Congress, relating to functions of War shipping administration, and for other purposes; and H. R. 2652, a bill to amend section 222 (E) of subtitle--Insurance of title II of the Merchant marine act, 1936, as amended. December 9, 1943, and February 10, 1944

Mode of access: Internet.

Employer EEO responsibilities : preventing discrimination in the workplace : the law and EEOC procedures /

"January 2002 (Revised)."

The New Architecture of EU Equality Law after CHEZ: Did the Court of Justice reconceptualise direct and indirect discrimination?

The Court of Justice’s decision of the 16 July 2015, in Case C-83/14 CHEZ Razpredelenie Bulgaria AD v Komisia za zashtita ot diskriminatsia, is a critically important case for two main reasons. First, it represents a further step along the path of addressing ethnic discrimination against Roma communities in Europe, particularly in Bulgaria, where the case arises. Second, it provides interpretations (sometimes controversial interpretations) of core concepts in the EU antidiscrimination Directives that will be drawn on in the application of equality law well beyond Bulgaria, and well beyond the pressing problem of ethnic discrimination against Roma. This article focuses particularly on the second issue, the potentially broader implications of the case. In particular, it will ask whether the Court of Justice’s approach in CHEZ is subtly redrawing the boundaries of EU equality law in general, in particular by expanding the concept of direct discrimination, or whether the result and the approach adopted is sui generis, one depending on the particular context of the case and the fact that it involves allegations of discrimination against Roma, and therefore of limited general application.