Landlord's and Free Ex

[Nicholas Aroney]

I don't know about the law in the US, but the "hypo" was decidedly not
hypothetical in our (Australian) case of *Burke v Tralaggan and Anor* [1986]
EOC 92-161.  Joint owners of a unit (apartment) refused on religious grounds
to rent it to an unmarried couple.  The New South Wales Equal Opportunity
Tribunal held that this was a breach of section 48 of the
Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW), which prohibits withholding
accommodation on the basis of marital status.  The owners failed in their
arguement that they fell under the exemption in section 56 for established
religious bodies.

Being a State Act, there was no question of whether the Act infringed the
free exercise clause of section 116 of the Australian Commonwealth
Constitution, since section 116 applies only to the Commonwealth.  (We have
no equivalent of the American 14th Amendment.)

I likewise  use the case to alert students to the issues involved.  They too
do not have much sympathy for the owners of the unit, despite my attempts at
pointing out the implications.  It will be interesting to see if the
parallel examples will prove useful when I use them next year.


Nicholas Aroney

BA, LLB (Hons), LLM
Associate Lecturer in Law
T C Beirne School of Law
The University of Queensland
St Lucia  4072
AUSTRALIA

Telephone               +61-07-3365-3053
Fax             +61-07-3365-1466
Mobile          +61-015-766-156
Email           n.aroney at mailbox.uq.edu.au