Assistance Dog Refusal Laws: Addressing the Impact of Inconsistent State Legislation

Assistance dogs and their handlers face discrimination every day in the form of being refused entry into public transport, public places, and accommodation. There are two legal pathways that assistance dog and handlers (AD handlers) can rely upon to receive redress for these refusals. First, they can report the event to either the federal Australian Human Rights Commission or the equivalent state anti-discrimination body. Second, they can report the matter as an offence under various pieces of legislation that apply to companion animals or public transport. However, there are several barriers which prevent AD handlers from accessing justice. The laws governing assistance dogs differ considerably between states. These differences extend to the areas where AD handlers are allowed to enter, as well as the penalties for refusal. There may also be a lack of clarity with respect to which individuals (including police officers) might be responsible for enforcing penalties. The purpose of this research will be to investigate where these barriers exist in anti-discrimination and companion animal legislation. These barriers may include the lack of clarity within legislation, as well as practical barriers to enforcing these laws.