Abstract
The vast majority of discrimination complaints do not reach a substantive hearing. Most are resolved through alternative dispute resolution (ADR), or withdrawn or settled prior to hearing; however, there is little publicly available information on the outcomes the parties negotiate prior to hearing. This article presents a study of settling discrimination complaints in Victoria based on interviews conducted with participants in that process. It explores the reasons why parties decide to settle rather than litigate, and examines what outcome complainants initially seek and what they ultimately settle for. Since many of the findings are consistent with earlier empirical studies, the article concludes by canvassing recent reform options that would address persistent problems with anti-discrimination law and improve its effectiveness in addressing individual complaints and wider discrimination.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 778-799 |
| Number of pages | 22 |
| Journal | Griffith Law Review |
| Volume | 18 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 1 Jan 2009 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Cite this
}
Behind the conciliation doors : Settling discrimination complaints in Victoria. / Allen, Dominique.
In: Griffith Law Review, Vol. 18, No. 3, 01.01.2009, p. 778-799.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Research › peer-review
TY - JOUR
T1 - Behind the conciliation doors
T2 - Settling discrimination complaints in Victoria
AU - Allen, Dominique
PY - 2009/1/1
Y1 - 2009/1/1
N2 - The vast majority of discrimination complaints do not reach a substantive hearing. Most are resolved through alternative dispute resolution (ADR), or withdrawn or settled prior to hearing; however, there is little publicly available information on the outcomes the parties negotiate prior to hearing. This article presents a study of settling discrimination complaints in Victoria based on interviews conducted with participants in that process. It explores the reasons why parties decide to settle rather than litigate, and examines what outcome complainants initially seek and what they ultimately settle for. Since many of the findings are consistent with earlier empirical studies, the article concludes by canvassing recent reform options that would address persistent problems with anti-discrimination law and improve its effectiveness in addressing individual complaints and wider discrimination.
AB - The vast majority of discrimination complaints do not reach a substantive hearing. Most are resolved through alternative dispute resolution (ADR), or withdrawn or settled prior to hearing; however, there is little publicly available information on the outcomes the parties negotiate prior to hearing. This article presents a study of settling discrimination complaints in Victoria based on interviews conducted with participants in that process. It explores the reasons why parties decide to settle rather than litigate, and examines what outcome complainants initially seek and what they ultimately settle for. Since many of the findings are consistent with earlier empirical studies, the article concludes by canvassing recent reform options that would address persistent problems with anti-discrimination law and improve its effectiveness in addressing individual complaints and wider discrimination.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79951745906&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/10854664.2009.10854664
DO - 10.1080/10854664.2009.10854664
M3 - Article
VL - 18
SP - 778
EP - 799
JO - Griffith Law Review
JF - Griffith Law Review
SN - 1038-3441
IS - 3
ER -