# Can I use both my state's anti-discrimination laws and the national human rights rules for my case?

- Jurisdiction: Australia
- Practice area: Employment Law
- Published: 2026-10-23
- Last updated: 2026-10-23
- Canonical: https://lawasked.com/au/employment-law/can-i-use-both-my-state-s-anti

## Question

I am currently living in Queensland and I am feeling quite overwhelmed by a situation at my workplace. About three months ago, in early February, my manager at a local retail shop made several very offensive and derogatory comments about my ethnic background in front of two other staff members. This happened during a staff meeting where we were discussing the new seasonal labour programme. I felt deeply insulted and targeted because of my race. I have already lodged a formal internal grievance with the company's HR department, but they dismissed my complaint last week, claiming it was just a misunderial misunderstanding. Because of this, I am looking into taking legal action. I know there is a specific state law in Queensland that handles discrimination, and I also know there are national human rights protections in Australia. If I decide to start a legal process using the state-based laws to address this specific incident, am I still allowed to file a separate complaint through the national human rights commission for the same event, or does choosing the state route mean I lose my right to use the national one?

## Summary

No, if you choose to pursue your complaint through Queensland's state laws, you generally cannot also file a separate complaint for the same incident through the national human rights commission. Once you take action under state law, you are deemed unable to pursue the same matter under the national Act.

## Analysis

Under the Racial Discrimination Act 1975, which is the national law covering racial discrimination, there is a specific rule regarding how state and national laws interact. The law states that if a state law deals with the same matter, "the person shall be deemed never to have been, and is not, entitled to make a complaint or institute a proceeding under the Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986" [cite:au-racial-discrimination-1975-sec6a]. This means that because your manager's offensive comments in February involve your ethnic background, you have a choice between using the Queensland state-based protections or the national protections. However, once you have "made a complaint, instituted a proceeding or taken any other action" under the Queensland law regarding this specific incident, you lose the right to use the national human rights commission for that same event [cite:au-racial-discrimination-1975-sec6a]. 

While the national law does not intend to "exclude or limit the operation of a law of a State or Territory" that works alongside it [cite:au-racial-discrimination-1975-sec6a], it prevents you from 'double-dipping' or running two separate legal processes for the exact same act of discrimination. This is to ensure that a person is not subject to multiple overlapping legal actions for a single event. In your case, since you are looking into taking legal action regarding the comments made during the staff meeting, you must decide which pathway you want to follow before you officially lodge your claim. 

It is also worth noting that under the Fair Work Act 2009, an employer is prohibited from taking adverse action—which means treating an employee poorly or unfairly—because of their race [cite:au-fair-work-2009-sec351]. This provides an additional legal context for your workplace situation, but the rule regarding choosing between state and national human rights complaints remains the primary restriction on your ability to use both simultaneously.

## Statutory citations

- Racial Discrimination Act 1975, Section 6A - Operation of State and Territory laws [in force] (https://www.legislation.gov.au/C2004A00274/latest/text)
  > the person shall be deemed never to have been, and is not, entitled to make a complaint or institute a proceeding under the Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 alleging that the act or omission is unlawful
- Fair Work Act 2009, Section 351 - Discrimination [in force] (https://www.legislation.gov.au/C2009A00028/latest/text)
  > An employer must not take adverse action against a person who is an employee... because of the person's race

---
General information only, not legal advice. See https://lawasked.com/disclaimer