The CAMS medical standards, including those relating to eyesight, are based on the equivalent FAI regulations.
In such cases, the legal onus lies upon the party seeking to establish the exception: (1967) 2 NSWLR 532.
This conclusion is also in accordance with the general approach to allocating the onus of proof by asking who will succeed if no evidence is lead by either party on a particular issue.
(3) Subsection (1) does not render unlawful discrimination against a person: (a) if the person is not reasonably capable of performing the actions reasonably required in relation to the sporting activity; or (b) if the persons who participate or are to participate in the sporting activities are selected by a method which is reasonable on the basis of their skills and abilities relevant to the sporting activity and relative to each other; or (c) if a sporting activity is conducted only for persons who have a particular disability and the first-mentioned person does not have that disability.
99 Consideration of exceptions and exemptions In determining whether an act is unlawful under a provision of Part 2, the Commission is not required to have regard to any exception or exemption provided for in that Part unless there is evidence before the Commission that the exception or exemption is or may be applicable in relation to that act. LEGAL ISSUES The complainant contends that the respondent bears the legal burden of proving on the balance of probabilities that one or other of the exceptions in section 28(3) applies.
He underwent a full medical examination as required by the respondent.