翻訳と辞書 Words near each other ・ Brandy Moss-Scott ・ Brandy Norwood ・ Brandy Norwood products ・ Brandy Payne ・ Brandy Pond ・ Brandy Pond Seaplane Base ・ Brandy Reed ・ Brandy Semchuk ・ Brandy snaps ・ Brandy Sour ・ Brandy Sour (Cyprus) ・ Brandy Station Confederate order of battle ・ Brandy Station Union order of battle ・ Brandy Station, Virginia ・ Brandy Talore ・ Brandy v Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission ・ Brandy videography ・ Brandy Wharf ・ Brandybuck Clan ・ Brandyn Curry ・ Brandyn Dombrowski ・ Brandyn Thompson ・ BrandYourself ・ Brandys ・ Brandys (surname) ・ Brandywell Stadium ・ Brandywell, Isle of Man ・ Brandywine ・ Brandywine (tomato) ・ Brandywine Airport Dictionary Lists mini英和辞書 mini和英辞書 Webster 1913 Latin-English FOLDOC Wikipedia English ウィキペディア

翻訳と辞書　辞書検索 [ 開発暫定版 ] スポンサード リンク Brandy v Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission ： ウィキペディア英語版 Brandy v Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Brandy v Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC) was a case before the high court of Australia determining that the HREOC did not exercise judicial power, setting a precedent on the limitation of which bodies could be recognized as exercising judicial power. == Facts of the case == Up until 1992, Australia's Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (the HREOC), in response to complaints of racial discrimination lodged in accordance with the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth) (the RDA), was able to make determinations. These were voluntary, and in the event complainants chose not to comply with them, there was no mechanism for enforcement. The only option available to complainants was to make an application to the Federal Court to have the matter re-heard. The case of ''Maynard v Neilson'' criticised this process as being costly and unnecessarily repetitive. This prompted the federal government to legislate amendments to the RDA in order to rectify the problem. These were the Sex Discrimination and other Legislation Amendment Act 1992 and the Law and Justice Legislation Amendment Act 1993. The sections which these amendments introduced into Part III of the RDA allowed for determinations made by the HREOC to be registered with the Federal Court. These determinations, upon registration, would have the effect of being an order made by the Federal court, unless a respondent applied for a review. In the ''Brandy'' case, Harry Brandy and John Bell were both officers of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC). Bell lodged a complaint against Brandy and ATSIC with the HREOC alleging contraventions to the RDA. The HREOC conducted an inquiry and handed down a determination that both Brandy and ATSIC were to pay compensation to Bell and to apologise to him. This determination was registered with the Federal Court, prompting Brandy to firstly seek a review and secondly to make an application to the High Court for the present case. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Brandy v Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク 翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.