Sabitlenmiş Tweet
MEDIA STATEMENT
Federal Court Matters Concerning Education Department Barring Notices Return to Court Friday
Two disability discrimination matters involving the South Australian Department for Education and the Minister for Education will return to the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia in Adelaide this Friday.
The matters are:
ADG321/2025 – Matthews v State of South Australia (Department for Education)
ADG404/2025 – Matthews v State of South Australia (Minister for Education)
Both proceedings arise from complaints concerning the administration and review of barring notices issued under Section 94 of the Education and Children’s Services Act 2019 (SA).
The issues were previously raised in the South Australian Parliament by Independent MLC Frank Pangallo on 1 May 2025. In Hansard, Mr Pangallo noted that the Minister for Education had been made aware of active complaints before the Australian Human Rights Commission concerning the administration of barring notices.
The earliest of those complaints was filed on 1 July 2024 and alleges disability discrimination in the Ministerial review process.
The Hansard record also notes that the Minister acknowledged awareness of those complaints through correspondence with the Australian Human Rights Commission on 25 November 2024, three days prior to introducing the Education and Children’s Services (Barring Notices and Other Protections) Amendment Bill in the House of Assembly.
Court records show a related proceeding, ADG260/2025 Matthews v State of South Australia (Department for Education), has already been resolved outside of court.
A further discrimination complaint concerning the treatment of the applicant’s son and the ongoing refusal of disability accommodations has recently been accepted by the Australian Human Rights Commission with the Department notified.
In ADG321/2025 the Department for Education is accused of discrimination after a veteran with diagnosed sensorineural hearing loss was instructed to remove hearing aids and deactivate their hearing aid microphones as a precondition to attend a meeting concerning the disability support needs of their ADHD daughter.
According to court documents, the Department’s stated reason was to prevent illegal recording under the Surveillance Devices Act.
The veteran declined to remove the hearing devices, noting the Surveillance Devices Act specifically states hearing aids are exempt, and was subsequently removed from the meeting.
A barring notice was then issued preventing the veteran from attending the school grounds based on his refusal to comply.
As a result of that barring notice, the veteran was unable to attend their son’s school graduation.
The veteran appealed the administrative decision to the Minister for Education.
In ADG404/2025 the Minister is alleged to have further discriminated during the review process of that barring notice by requiring all evidence to be provided in written form after being informed that the applicant is dyslexic and unable to participate on an equal basis in a written-only process.
The Minister refused to meet with the veteran.
Court documents indicate the Minister contends the decision was statutory and therefore not capable of constituting discrimination under the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth). The applicant disputes that interpretation.
The fourth recently accepted complaint before the Australian Human Rights Commission concerns the treatment of the applicant’s son, who has autism and ADHD.
Despite repeated requests for accommodations, the student has not been issued a OnePlan support plan. Now halfway through the school term, he has been suspended three times based on behaviour that his parents say are completely foreseeable and predictable given the lack of supports in place.
The Department has responded by issuing the parent with a further communication restriction because he raised the issue with the Australian Human Rights Commission.
English
