Skip links and keyboard navigation

Decisions and cases

Decisions about anti-discrimination matters made by:

Exemption cases

The following cases, found on the Australasian Legal Information Institute website, best represent the law and procedures related to successful exemption applications:

  • Auto & General Insurance Co Ltd and Insurers Hotline Pty Ltd, QADT 2, 27 January 2009
  • State of Queensland (acting through the Department of Corrective Services), QADT 26, 5 November 2008
  • Raytheon Australia Pty Ltd & Ors, QADT 1, 25 January 2008
  • AMACSU, QSU, FCUNQ and UniTAB, QADT 18, 9 July 2007
  • Brisbane Housing Company Limited, QADT 9, 19 March 2007
  • Miami Recreational Facilities Pty Ltd, QADT 7, 7 March 2007
  • Beach House Group Pty Ltd, QADT 30, 19 July 2006
  • Annette’s Network, QADT 29, 19 July 2006
  • Palmpoint Pty Ltd, QADT 12, 7 April 2006
  • Rentokil Initial Pty Ltd, QADT 39, 23 December 2005
  • J&D Richards Developments Pty Ltd, QADT 13, 29 July 2005
  • State of Queensland (acting through Dept of Corrective Services), QADT 1, 5 January 2005
  • ZigZag Young Women’s Resource Centre Inc, QADT 41, 21 December 2004
  • Fernwood Women’s Health Club Pty Ltd, QADT 27, 27 November 2003
  • Brisbane International Business Institute Pty Ltd, QADT 26, 21 November 2003
  • Boeing Australia Holdings Pty Ltd & related entities, QADT 26, 21 November 2003
  • Dan Everson Podiatry, QADT 5, 1 April 2003
  • Grey Army Gold Coast, QADT 1, 11 February 2003
  • Belvitta Pty Ltd t/as Arthur Murray Dance Studios, QADT 24, 21 August 2002
  • Mt Isa Mines, QADT 14, 11 July 2002
  • Mt Isa Mines, QADT 16, 28 August 2001
  • APN News & Media Ltd & others, QADT 17, 28 August 2001
  • Real Estate Institute of Qld & Qld Resident Accommodation Managers Association, QADT12, 9 November 1995

Non-party disclosure cases

The following cases, found on the Australasian Legal Information Institute website, best represent the law and procedures related to non-party disclosure applications:

  • Waite v Kings College [2005] QADT 1 – Endnotes paragraphs 18, 19. 20, 21.
  • RK v State of Queensland & Ors [2007] QADT 24.

Back to top

Any description of QCAT's jurisdiction on this website is general information only and is not intended to precisely define the types of applications that QCAT has the power to decide. QCAT's jurisdiction is determined by the relevant legislation. If you are unsure about your legal rights you should seek legal advice. Any actions taken to resolve your dispute should be determined by your individual circumstances.

Last reviewed
9 November 2011
Last updated
27 March 2012

Rate this page

  1. How useful was the information on this page?