The Federal Court has dismissed an appeal from Sal Grover and her company, Giggle for Girls, over findings they had indirectly discriminated against Roxanne Tickle when she was removed from their social media app.
The appeal court also found in favour of a cross-appeal from Tickle, which argued Grover and her company had directly discriminated against her, a finding that was not delivered by the original judge hearing the case, Justice Robert Bromwich.
Justice Melissa Perry, Justice Geoffrey Kennett and Justice Wendy Abraham delivered their findings in the Sydney court on Friday afternoon, with a live stream broadcasting the judgement to a national audience.
The judgement compels Grover and her company to pay the original $10,000 in compensation, plus an additional $10,000 for the finding of direct discrimination. The court also ordered they are responsible for legal costs totaling $100,000 across the original case and the appeal.
The case is the first to test changes made to the Sex Discrimination Act in 2013 when protections on the basis of gender identity were introduced.
Ahead of the decision being handed down Grover said she would be appealing for the High Court to review the case if the judges did not find in her favour.
Professor Paula Gerber from Monash University has commented on the finding and shared her thoughts on how Australia’s legislation differs from the United Kingdom.
“Justice Perry, Justice Abraham, Justice Kennett unanimously held that excluding a trans woman from an online spaced created for women amounted to direct discrimination on the basis of gender identity in breach of s.22 of the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth). The Full Court has provided clear guidance on how the inclusion of gender identity, as a prohibited ground of discrimination, is to be interpreted and applied. Denying a trans woman access to goods and services based on an erroneous belief that they are male, is unlawful.
“The Full Court’s decision sends a very clear message that Australia does not permit discrimination against trans people on the basis of their gender identity. Although every case must be decided on its unique facts, the decision in Giggle v Tickle sets a powerful precedent on how the provisions of the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth) relating to gender identity discrimination are to be interpreted.” Professor Gerber said.
“The Full Court’s decision affirms that Australia has strong legislation that protects trans people from discrimination on the basis of their gender identity and Australia is not at risk of following the path the UK has gone down with the Supreme Court decision in For Women Scotland.”
