Tracey Gorman in May 2018 filed the complaint against the Commissioner for Social Housing with the ACT Human Rights Commission (HRC), alleging discrimination in the provision of goods, services and facilities and accommodation.

Nearly 18 months later, the parties reached a conciliation agreement containing six clauses that the housing commissioner had to undertake.

Completed were two related to works at the premises and another to undertaking disability awareness training for staff.

Other clauses related to reviewing policies for modifications to disability premises were not completed within the agreed timeframe of four to six months.

After about 200 pages of emails and other communications among Ms Gorman's lawyers, the HRC and the housing commissioner in trying to get those obligations met, she filed an application with the ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal in April this year.

A recent tribunal publication states that her claims detailed the stress and frustration she experienced while trying to enforce the conciliation agreement, the emotional toll it has taken on her and her loss of faith in the housing commissioner.

Her evidence was unchallenged.

MORE NEWS

By the time the matter went to the tribunal hearing in July this year, the obligations were still unmet with the social housing commissioner conceding so.

Ms Gorman argued for compensation to reflect the hurt, stress and inconvenience of having to pursue enforcement of the obligations.

She said that given the delays, simply making orders to enforce the agreed terms would not be enough and "that something more is required to 'give effect to' the agreement and to ensure compliance".

Ms Gorman also said such an order would accelerate the commissioner's action to fulfill its obligations in future cases and reduce the need of vulnerable parties to refer to the tribunal.

She cited other jurisdictions that can make compensation orders, including up to $100,000 in NSW.

RELATED NEWS

Tribunal presidential member Heidi Robinson criticised the delay, saying it was disappointing.

"I acknowledge that the applicant, having negotiated a settlement in good faith, is frustrated and hurt by the process," Ms Robinson said.

She said the housing commissioner's responses "while polite and apologetic were generally also vague and non-committal as to timeframes".

"I share the applicant's concerns that simply ordering the respondent to do what it agreed to do several years ago does not truly give effect to the spirit of the conciliated agreement.

"However, this alone does not grant me to the power to award damages or compensation for the breach, or to alter the terms of the settlement agreement to provide a monetary remedy for the delay."

Ms Robinson said the relevant sections in the ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act did not give the tribunal power to impose punitive orders on parties that fail to comply with conciliation agreements.

The tribunal also did not make orders about enforcing the conciliation agreement.

Ms Robinson said the act meant the tribunal may only make those agreements as orders, but the orders were "enforceable through an enforcement process in the magistrates court".

The ACT Government has been contacted for comment about their obligations to Ms Gorman.

Our journalists work hard to provide local, up-to-date news to the community. This is how you can continue to access our trusted content: