I completed watching lecture #20 just now.

The remaining half of lecture # 20 concerned Andrews and the narrowing of the floodgates of the court. There were hundred and hundreds in fact 600 cases waiting before Andrews was decided. The court narrowed the concept of without discrimination to mean without harmful discrimination. But they also suggested that the grounds could be analogous to the particular grounds in section 15.

The court also and this is different from the US courts opened the legislation to more than harmful intentional purpose to include harmful but unintended effects. The example is height restrictions for firefighters or police officers where the intended effect is to have big people capable of doing the heavy work of these jobs but the unintended effect is too discriminate against women or maybe Asians where these groups of people might be through no fault of their own shorter generally. Thus the unintended effect is to discriminate against gender or ethnic origin.