High Court may lead to workers comp discrimination: HREOC

High Court may lead to workers comp discrimination: HREOC

The Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission has noted that the High Court decision in Attorney-General (Vic) v Andrews (2007) HCA 9 upheld workers’ compensation laws allowing large companies to opt out of compulsory state schemes. This decision may have unintended consequences for workers in same-sex relationships according to Human Rights Commissioner Graeme Innes AM.

Under the Commonwealth workers’ compensation scheme, the same-sex partner of an injured or deceased employee is not entitled to workers’ compensation, whereas state workers’ compensation schemes do provide this protection.

“An opposite-sex partner of an employee covered by a federal workers’ compensation scheme has the security of knowing that he or she will be financially supported if his or her partner dies or is injured on the job. A same-sex partner has no such security,” Commissioner Innes said.

“The Comcare system should change to give people in same-sex relationships the same workers’ compensation coverage protecting opposite-sex couples.”

The Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission is currently finalising the report of the National Inquiry into Discrimination Against People in Same-Sex Relationship regarding Financial and Work-related Entitlements (Same-Sex: Same Entitlements).

The Inquiry covers discrimination against same-sex couples and families in several areas of federal law including:

employment laws (personal and parental leave, workers’ compensation, travel entitlements for federal employees)
tax laws
social security and veterans’ entitlement laws
Medicare and PBS Safety Nets
superannuation laws, and
aged care laws.

Link to HREOC

Decision in Attorney-General (Vic) v. Andrews

Request an Appointment
Fill in the form below to find out if you have a claim.
Request an Appointment - Stephen Page
Things to Read, Watch & Listen

Surrogacy in Cyprus: Understanding the North vs South Divide

Surrogacy in Cyprus sounds, at first glance, like it might offer a Mediterranean alternative for intended parents looking overseas. In reality, Cyprus is not one surrogacy destination but two very different legal and political environments sitting on the same island. That divide matters enormously. For Australians in particular, surrogacy in Cyprus raises serious practical, legal… Read More »Surrogacy in Cyprus: Understanding the North vs South Divide

Surrogacy in Kyrgyzstan: The New Frontier or a Legal Minefield?

Surrogacy in Kyrgyzstan is suddenly attracting attention, particularly among intended parents looking for countries that appear more open than the usual destinations. On paper, the change is striking. In 2024, Kyrgyzstan introduced laws allowing surrogacy and, unlike some neighbouring former Soviet states, it appears to permit a much broader group of intended parents to access… Read More »Surrogacy in Kyrgyzstan: The New Frontier or a Legal Minefield?

The End of International Surrogacy in Kenya? What Australians Need to Know

Surrogacy in Kenya has long sat in an uneasy space. It has been available, it has been used by some foreign intended parents, and yet it has operated in a legal environment that is largely unregulated. For Australians, that combination should always have rung alarm bells. The numbers alone tell part of the story. Very… Read More »The End of International Surrogacy in Kenya? What Australians Need to Know

Family Law Section Law Council of Australia Award
Member of Queensland law society
Family law Practitioners Association
International Academy of Family Lawyers - IAFL
Mediator Standards Board