GAY TRUTH

The recent NSW decision of Passas v Comensoli [2019] NSWCATAP 298 (18 December 2019) provides an example of someone who has been penalized for “homosexual vilification” as a result of comments concerning same-sex marriage. However, it does provide clarification that merely to express disagreement with the introduction of same-sex marriage does not amount to such vilification under NSW law. The Facts Ms. Passas and Mr. Comensoli were fellow occupants of a block of units in Ashfield. On 15 November 2017, the results of the postal survey on the introduction of same-sex marriage were announced, with 61% of respondents to the survey in favor. Mr. Comensoli, in celebration of the result, draped a rainbow flag over his balcony. Ms. Passas disagreed with the proposed change. What followed was summarised by the Appeal Panel of the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal as follows: [I]t was found that on 15 November 2017 she made loud verbal demands upon the Respondent to remove the fla

In a Federation like Australia , different jurisdictions (States and Territories) may have different rules on what amounts to “discrimination” or “vilification”, and how those things interact with religious freedom. One of the pressing issues here in recent years has been whether there will be a “race to the bottom” in freedom of speech on religious issues, with one jurisdiction in particular, Tasmania, raising deep concerns with a very broad prohibition on causing “offence” related to matters such as sexual orientation. Today the High Court of Australia , on appeal from NSW , has affirmed the decision of the NSW Court of Appeal that State and Territory “tribunals” (non-judicial panels usually used in discrimination issues) have no jurisdiction to impose penalties on residents of other Australian jurisdictions under their own local laws. The important decision in  Burns v Corbett [2018] HCA 15 (18 April 2018) (court-prepared summary available  here ) is a good outcome, and at