Page:Tickle v Giggle for Girls Pty Ltd (No 2).pdf/70

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

204 By reason of the foregoing, I readily conclude that the two statutes can and do operate harmoniously. Section 24 of the Qld BDM Registration Act complements the gender identity discrimination provisions of the SDA, rather than conflicting with them. It follows that the respondents' challenge to the validity or application of s 24(4) of the Qld BDM Registration Act must fail.

PART 6: REMEDIES

205 Ms Tickle seeks the following relief:

(a) declarations that the respondents contravened s 22 of the SDA;
(b) $100,000 in general damages;
(c) $100,000 in aggravated damages;
(d) a published written apology from the respondents; and
(e) an order that Giggle reinstate Ms Tickle's access to the Giggle App on equal terms to other female users per its usual terms of trade.

206 Before I turn to address each remedy sought, it is necessary to consider the limits on this Court's jurisdiction to award that relief.

207 Ms Tickle's standing to make the present application in this Court arises from the AHRC's termination of her earlier complaint, and the notification of Ms Tickle of that termination: s 46PO(1) of the AHRC Act. As I decided in Hanson v Burston [2022] FCA 1234 at [44], however, that provision does not grant applicants an unfettered right to litigate. Rather, the unlawful discrimination alleged must meet the requirements of s 46PO(3), namely:

The unlawful discrimination alleged in the application:

(a) must be the same as (or the same in substance as) the unlawful discrimination that was the subject of the terminated complaint; or

(b) must arise out of the same (or substantially the same) acts, omissions or practices that were the subject of the terminated complaint.

208 If this Court is satisfied that unlawful discrimination within the bounds of s 46PO(3) has taken place, it may make a variety of orders under s 46PO(4) of the AHRC Act, including the following:

(a) an order declaring that the respondent has committed unlawful discrimination and directing the respondent not to repeat or continue such unlawful discrimination;

(b) an order requiring a respondent to perform any reasonable act or course of

Tickle v Giggle for Girls Pty Ltd (No 2) [2024] FCA 960
63