Budini v Sunnyfield [2019] FCA 2164

Budini v Sunnyfield [2019] FCA 2164

Michael Budini does not have standing under the AHRC Act as an 'affected person' to apply for leave for remedies in his personal capacity; in any event, leave to commence proceedings based on unlawful discrimination for both applicants is refused due to unreasonable and unexplained delay, lack of reasonable prospects of success for the claims, and significant prejudice to the respondents, especially regarding the unavailability of key witnesses and loss of records.

Parties
First Applicant: Enrica Budini; Second Applicant: Michael Budini; First Respondent: Sunnyfield ACN 000415127; Second Respondent: Mark Clayton
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 December 2019
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Commence Proceeding Under the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (cth) and Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (cth) / Judgment on Interlocutory Leave Application
Outcome
application for leave dismissed; relevant claims struck out
Legal Topics
Disability Discrimination, Standing to Apply for Leave, Delay and Discretion to Grant Leave, Compensation Under Disability Discrimination Act, Role of Litigation Guardian, Damages for Unlawful Discrimination
Human Rights Administrative Law Discrimination Law Constitutional Law Disability Discrimination Standing to Apply for Leave Delay and Discretion to Grant Leave Compensation Under Disability Discrimination Act +2 more

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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Enrica Budini

First Applicant

Michael Budini

Second Applicant

Sunnyfield ACN 000415127

First Respondent

Mark Clayton

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Commence Proceeding Under the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (cth) and Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (cth) / Judgment on Interlocutory Leave Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the second applicant (Michael Budini) is an 'affected person' having standing to apply for leave for a proceeding under the Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (Cth)
  2. 2 Whether delay between events complained of and lodging complaint should preclude leave to bring a proceeding for unlawful discrimination
  3. 3 Whether proposed claims have reasonable prospects of success

Ratio Decidendi

Michael Budini does not have standing under the AHRC Act as an 'affected person' to apply for leave for remedies in his personal capacity; in any event, leave to commence proceedings based on unlawful discrimination for both applicants is refused due to unreasonable and unexplained delay, lack of reasonable prospects of success for the claims, and significant prejudice to the respondents, especially regarding the unavailability of key witnesses and loss of records.

Court Disposition

application for leave dismissed; relevant claims struck out

Orders

  • The applicants' interlocutory application dated 22 October 2018 is dismissed.
  • All parts of the amended originating application seeking relief under the Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (Cth) for contraventions of the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth) are struck out.