Mr Cole's application alleging discrimination by WorkSafe was summarily dismissed under s 75 of the VCAT Act as misconceived. WorkSafe's statutory role in monitoring and regulating self-insurers under the WIRC Act does not constitute the provision of a 'service' to individual workers under s 44 of the EO Act, following Kavanagh; the regulatory function is discretionary and supervisory and does not confer a benefit on individual claimants. A discrimination claim in the area of employment under the EO Act requires an employer-employee relationship with the respondent, which was absent here. Charter of Human Rights claims piggy-backed onto an EO Act application cannot survive summary dismissal of the EO Act claim where the applicant has no entitlement to seek relief under the EO Act, following Lawton v State of Victoria (Victoria Police) [2023] VCAT 440.
The full text is available to signed-in members.