Case: Lina Obieta v Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission [2006] FCA 1684
Outcome: referred to
Ms Obieta instituted these proceedings nominating the Commission as the first respondent. However, Ms Obieta later instituted separate proceedings against the Commission (see Lina Obieta v Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission [2006] FCA 1684) and the Court ordered that the Commission be removed as first respondent to these proceedings. 15 The fifth and sixth respondents were fellow students of Ms Obieta. Ms Obieta has alleged that they engaged in conduct which was unlawful pursuant to the SDA, RDA and the HREOC Act. 16 A section entitled 'Specific Issues' considered hereunder contains details of the 48 issues raised by Ms Obieta of alleged discrimination, harassment and victimisation under the RDA and SDA. It follows the same order as contained in the Statement of the Precise Matters raised against each respondent contained in Ms Obieta's submissions filed on 16 June 2006. Such document was prepared in response to the Court's direction that Ms Obieta provide a list of precise matters upon which she relied and the sections of the relevant legislation which she claimed were breached. 77 Ms Obieta claims that Mr Norman gave less favourable treatment to her and created hostility in the class. He referred to Ms Roxanna Ramos as ' Roxan' in his greeting to her. He called upon Ms Cecilia Cordova to recite a passage and referred to her as ' Lina' . Ms Obieta claims that when Mr Norman apologised for calling Ms Cordova 'Lina', this created hostility from other students in the class. She claims that Mr Norman's less favourable treatment of her had the effect of violating or impairing her rights on an equal footing with other students and made her feel ridiculed. As such she claims that she was subjected to harassment or bullying which is at law, ' being subject to any other detriment '. Such conduct is alleged to be a breach of ss 9, 17 and 27 of the RDA and s 94 of the SDA. 78 Mr Norman says that he inadvertently referred to Ms Cordova as Lina, realised his mistake and apologised to Ms Cordova. He states that it was not an attempt by him to incite other students to feel contempt for Ms Obieta. 79 Ms Obieta states that during the class discussion on 8 September 2004, Mr Norman came closer to her, looked at her and said in a nasty way: 'Oh, I don't want to be representing a client who assaulted somebody.' 97 Ms Obieta claims that when called upon to recite something, Mr Norman referred to Ms Davis as ' Lina' . When Ms Obieta's name was called out, Ms Obieta alleges that Ms Davis made the noise of a duck or chicken. She claims that Ms Davis was mimicking manner of speech or her Asian accent in class and that Ms Davis made racist sounds in her presence. She claims that such conduct was harassment and constitutes ' being subject to any other detriment '. Ms Obieta claims that this constitutes a breach of ss 9, 17, 18C and 27 of the RDA. 98 Ms Davis states that she has no recollection of such event and does not believe that she has ever done so. She states that she does not mimic ducks or chickens. 99 Ms Fogarty testifies that she does not recall Ms Davis ever making any duck or chicken noises.