Territory Stories

Annual Report 2006-2007 Northern Territory Anti-Discrimination Commission



Annual Report 2006-2007 Northern Territory Anti-Discrimination Commission

Other title

Tabled paper 1144


Tabled papers for 10th Assembly 2005 - 2008; Tabled papers; ParliamentNT






Made available by the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory under Standing Order 240. Where copyright subsists with a third party it remains with the original owner and permission may be required to reuse the material.




Tabled papers

File type




Copyright owner

See publication



Parent handle


Citation address


Page content

Northern Territory Anti-Discrimination Commission 2006/2007 Annual Report 23 Impairment (Disability) (cont) However the institution agreed to help the Complainant access some extra hours of assistance from another community service. They also agreed to purchase extra computer software to make it easier for the student to utilise the internet. As the students disabilities included difficulties with his speech, staff at the institution found communicating with him very difficult. However this was embarrassing for staff and they found it much easier to tell this to the Conciliation Officer at the Commission, rather than to the student personally. This was explained to the student and the staff apologised to him in writing saying it was not their intention to imply that he had an intellectual disability. The Commission was able to negotiate with the student and suggest to him some strategies to make his communication with the institution easier in the future. The student successfully completed the course and has moved on to study for a higher qualification. The computer institution decided to purchase more computer software and is now able to offer this facility to other students with disabilities. Race An Aboriginal man had received a cheque for $20,000 and went to a car yard with his family to buy a used car. After he agreed to purchase a vehicle for $8,000 the salesman took him to the bank to cash his cheque to make the payment. The salesman would not let the mans family members come with them to the bank. The Complainant said that when they were at the bank the salesman deposited $5000 of the cheque proceeds to the salesmans own bank account, saying that was the cost of cashing the cheque. When they returned to the car yard one of the buyers relatives asked where the additional $5000 from the cashed cheque was. The salesman said the cheque could not be cleared without the $5000 charge. When friends of the buyer later challenged the salesman and tried to obtain the Complainants $5000, the salesman said that he knew nothing about the money and that the buyer and his friends had all been drinking and didnt know what they were talking about. The Commission accepted the complaint and contacted the owner of the car yard who investigated the complaint and found that the allegations against his salesman were true. When the salesman refused to repay the $5000 to the Complainant he was fired by the owner. Although the $5000 had never been received by the business, the owner apologised for the behaviour of his former employee and offered to compensate the buyer in cash and repairs to his vehicle to the value of $5000. The Complainant was satisfied with the compensation paid by the owner and with the way the owner had dealt with the salesman by terminating his employment. On this basis he agreed that his complaint was resolved.