Court confirms protection gap between DV victims and those subject to ADVOs
A healthcare worker's claim that he was discriminated against after his employer learned of a domestic violence order against him was dismissed by a federal court.
Kul Raj Kandel, who worked as a specialized dementia carer at HammondCare, had his case thrown out on February 6, 2026, after Judge Doust ruled that being subject to an apprehended domestic violence order is not a protected attribute under Australian workplace law.
Kandel started working for the aged care provider in March or April 2024. His employment lasted just over three months before ending on July 16, 2024, shortly after his house manager raised concerns about an ADVO case involving his ex-wife.
According to court documents, the house manager expressed concerns about a police report related to the ADVO during a meeting on May 14, 2024. Kandel told the court he explained that the ADVO case was false and his police report had been cleared, but alleged the manager did not believe him.
Two months later, on July 15, 2024, Kandel received a call scheduling a meeting for the following day at 4pm. At that meeting, he said he was informed of bad feedback without being given details. He was then handed a termination letter that had been prepared six days earlier, on July 10, 2024.
Kandel argued the dismissal violated the Fair Work Act on multiple grounds. He claimed it breached section 351, which protects employees from discrimination based...
CLAIM: Videos purported to show damage and missile impacts in Israel amid its war with Iran. Unverified rumours accompanied them about the purported deaths of high-profile Israelis.BACKGROUND: Litt...