ALZ v Lismore City Council (No 2) [2016] NSWCATAD 250

ALZ v Lismore City Council (No 2) [2016] NSWCATAD 250

The Tribunal held that the just, quick and cheap resolution of the real issues was best served by allowing the Council an abbreviated opportunity to file further evidence and submissions. Although the Council had earlier opportunities and had failed or been late in complying with directions on occasion, determining the substantive privacy complaints without any respondent evidence would be contrary to natural justice and would likely cause further appeal, cost and delay. A short timetable would minimise prejudice to the applicant while allowing the matter to proceed to hearing.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 October 2016
Procedural Posture
External Review of Privacy Complaints Against a Local Council / Remitted After Appeal by Consent; Interlocutory Procedural Application to Set a Timetable for Further Evidence
Outcome
Respondent's application for a timetable was granted in substance and an abbreviated timetable was set.
Legal Topics
['privacy Principles' 'external Review' 'tribunal Procedure' 'timetable for Evidence' 'guiding Principle' 'natural Justice' 'case Management']
['administrative Law' 'privacy Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['privacy Principles' 'external Review' 'tribunal Procedure' 'timetable for Evidence' 'guiding Principle' 'natural Justice' 'case Management']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

External Review of Privacy Complaints Against a Local Council / Remitted After Appeal by Consent; Interlocutory Procedural Application to Set a Timetable for Further Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a timetable should be set for the filing and service of further evidence and submissions after the matter was remitted for reconsideration according to law.' 'Whether the respondent should be permitted to file further evidence on the substantive complaints despite earlier opportunities and some non-compliance with directions.' 'How the guiding principle in section 36 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 and the principles in AON Risk apply to the procedural discretion.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal held that the just, quick and cheap resolution of the real issues was best served by allowing the Council an abbreviated opportunity to file further evidence and submissions. Although the Council had earlier opportunities and had failed or been late in complying with directions on occasion, determining the substantive privacy complaints without any respondent evidence would be contrary to natural justice and would likely cause further appeal, cost and delay. A short timetable would minimise prejudice to the applicant while allowing the matter to proceed to hearing.

Court Disposition

Respondent's application for a timetable was granted in substance and an abbreviated timetable was set.

Orders

  • ['Evidence filed by either party in proceedings 133039 is to be evidence in these proceedings.' 'Respondent to file and serve any further evidence and submissions on which it relies by 9 November 2016.' 'Grant leave to the applicant, if she wishes, to file evidence and submissions in reply by 22 November 2016.'...