Ray v Superannuation Complaints Tribunal [2004] FCA 1120

Ray v Superannuation Complaints Tribunal [2004] FCA 1120

There was no valid decision made by the Board on 13 September 2001 concerning Mr Ray's claim, and thus the basis for the Tribunal's finding of no jurisdiction (out-of-time complaint) was removed. The Tribunal must give Mr Ray the opportunity to satisfy the requirements of s 19(1) of the SRC Act and consider his complaint according to law.

Parties
Applicant: Dale Patrick Ray; First Respondent: Superannuation Complaints Tribunal; Second Respondent: Fiona Power; Third Respondent: Board of Trustees of the State Public Sector Superannuation Scheme
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 August 2004
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review and Appeal / Final Judgment
Outcome
Matter remitted to the Tribunal for reconsideration in accordance with law and these reasons; Tribunal must give Mr Ray opportunity to satisfy s 19(1) of the SRC Act.
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction of Superannuation Complaints Tribunal, Time Limits on Superannuation Complaints, Delegation of Authority, Presumption of Regularity, Definition of Determination
Administrative Law Superannuation Law Jurisdiction of Superannuation Complaints Tribunal Time Limits on Superannuation Complaints Delegation of Authority Presumption of Regularity Definition of Determination

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 2 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dale Patrick Ray

Applicant

Superannuation Complaints Tribunal

First Respondent

Fiona Power

Second Respondent

Board of Trustees of the State Public Sector Superannuation Scheme

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review and Appeal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a valid decision was made by the Board or its delegate regarding the applicant's disability claim
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction to hear the complaint based on time limits prescribed by the SRC Act
  3. 3 Whether the presumption of regularity applies to the Board's purported decision

Ratio Decidendi

There was no valid decision made by the Board on 13 September 2001 concerning Mr Ray's claim, and thus the basis for the Tribunal's finding of no jurisdiction (out-of-time complaint) was removed. The Tribunal must give Mr Ray the opportunity to satisfy the requirements of s 19(1) of the SRC Act and consider his complaint according to law.

Court Disposition

Matter remitted to the Tribunal for reconsideration in accordance with law and these reasons; Tribunal must give Mr Ray opportunity to satisfy s 19(1) of the SRC Act.

Orders

  • Matter remitted to the Superannuation Complaints Tribunal for consideration and dealing according to law and consistently with the Court's reasons.