Jim Dimovski

The applicant alleged that his employment as a shuttle bus driver was terminated and he was subjected to differential treatment on the basis of his race, place of origin, ethnic origin, and ancestry.

The respondents maintained that the applicant's position was made redundant because the hotel outsourced its shuttle bus service for cost and efficiency reasons.

The Tribunal found no evidence to support the allegations of discrimination, concluding that the termination was based solely on legitimate business considerations.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant alleged discrimination on the basis of disability, race, and place of origin by the respondent police service during his apprehension under the Mental Health Act.

The applicant, who has paranoid schizophrenia, had threatened suicide, prompting a police response.

He alleged excessive force was used due to stereotypes.

The Tribunal dismissed the application, finding that the police officers' actions, including the decision to apprehend and the force used, were based on the applicant's actual behaviour and threats of self-harm, not on any Code-protected grounds.

The respondents requested reconsideration of an Interim Decision that found the applicant had established a prima facie case of discrimination.

The Tribunal dismissed the request as premature, finding that the Interim Decision was not a final decision disposing of the central issues in the complaint.

The Tribunal also provided clarification on the issues remaining in dispute for the upcoming hearing.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment based on disability and family status.

During the Case Resolution Conference, the respondents brought motions to dismiss the application for failure to establish a prima facie case, to remove the personal respondent, and to dismiss certain allegations for delay.

The Tribunal dismissed the motions, finding that the applicant had established a prima facie case of discrimination, that the personal respondent's removal was best addressed in closing submissions, and that the allegations fell within the one-year series of incidents provision.

The Tribunal issued case management directions for the continuation of the hearing.

The applicant filed a human rights complaint alleging discrimination in employment based on family status, record of offences, reprisal, disability, and marital status.

The respondents brought a motion to dismiss the application for failing to disclose a Code infringement and, alternatively, to remove the personal respondents.

The Tribunal found sufficient facts to support a potential claim of discrimination based on disability, as the applicant alleged he was under stress and received medical treatment.

However, the Tribunal dismissed the marital status claim, finding no link between the applicant's marital status and the alleged differential treatment.

The Tribunal also declined to remove the personal respondents at this preliminary stage.

The applicant filed a human rights application but failed to appear at the scheduled Case Resolution Conference.

The applicant had previously failed to attend mediation, failed to follow case management directions, and failed to maintain contact with the Tribunal or the respondent.

The respondent appeared at the conference and requested that the application be dismissed.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's behaviour indicated an intention to no longer pursue the application and dismissed it.