Braiding v Charles Sturt University [2015] NSWCATAD 242

Braiding v Charles Sturt University [2015] NSWCATAD 242

The Tribunal found that, as the President did not exercise the statutory power to decline any part of Mr Braiding's complaint, all matters alleged after 31 July 2013 were properly before the Tribunal, except Allegation 3, which was misconceived as a matter of law and summarily dismissed. The Tribunal refused to amend the complaint to include further fresh allegations, on the basis of prejudice, lack of merit, or because they properly ought to have been included in the original complaint, and directed the applicant to particularise and/or clarify certain remaining allegations.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 November 2015
Procedural Posture
Administrative Law – Anti Discrimination Complaint / Procedural Determination; Application to Amend Complaint; Summary Dismissal of Part of Complaint
Outcome
Partially dismissed and refused amendment; complaint to proceed in part subject to clarification and amendment by applicant
Legal Topics
['disability Discrimination' 'victimisation' 'aiding and Abetting' 'jurisdiction of Tribunal' 'amendments to Complaints' 'summary Dismissal']
['administrative Law' 'anti Discrimination Law'] ['disability Discrimination' 'victimisation' 'aiding and Abetting' 'jurisdiction of Tribunal' 'amendments to Complaints' 'summary Dismissal']

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

Administrative Law – Anti Discrimination Complaint / Procedural Determination; Application to Amend Complaint; Summary Dismissal of Part of Complaint

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Which allegations made to the President of the Anti-Discrimination Board were referred to the Tribunal?' 'Should any of those complaints be summarily dismissed pursuant to s 102 of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW)?' 'Should the Tribunal allow amendment of the complaint to add further allegations?']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that, as the President did not exercise the statutory power to decline any part of Mr Braiding's complaint, all matters alleged after 31 July 2013 were properly before the Tribunal, except Allegation 3, which was misconceived as a matter of law and summarily dismissed. The Tribunal refused to amend the complaint to include further fresh allegations, on the basis of prejudice, lack of merit, or because they properly ought to have been included in the original complaint, and directed the applicant to particularise and/or clarify certain remaining allegations.

Court Disposition

Partially dismissed and refused amendment; complaint to proceed in part subject to clarification and amendment by applicant

Orders

  • ['Allegation 3, that the Respondent breached s 52 of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW), is dismissed.' "The applicant's application to amend the complaint to add Points 1, 2, 3, 4, 5(a) and (b), 6, 7 (a) and (b), 8(a), (b) and (c), 9 and 10 of the Points of Claim document is refused." 'Within 3 weeks of the...