Choi v NSW Ombudsman [2024] NSWSC 352

Choi v NSW Ombudsman [2024] NSWSC 352

The plaintiff was granted an extension of time, but the summons was dismissed because she did not establish any reviewable error in either Tribunal decision. The challenge to the 2021 orders was unsupported and unsubstantiated. As to the refusal decision, the Tribunal recognised the plaintiff's disabilities, applied the leave principles, considered the relevant issues, and found no evidence that the Ombudsman's conduct was discriminatory or that the discrimination and victimisation complaints had reasonable prospects of success. The plaintiff's allegations relied on merits arguments and unsupported assertions rather than jurisdictional error, error of law, relevant/irrelevant...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 April 2024
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review of Decisions of the New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal / Summons Seeking Judicial Review With Application for Extension of Time
Outcome
Extension of time granted; summons dismissed; plaintiff ordered to pay the first defendant's costs; specified motions dismissed.
Legal Topics
['judicial Review' 'error of Law on the Face of the Record' 'jurisdictional Error' 'procedural Fairness' 'disability Discrimination' 'victimisation' 'ombudsman Immunity' 'leave to Proceed in Ncat']
['administrative Law' 'anti Discrimination Law'] ['judicial Review' 'error of Law on the Face of the Record' 'jurisdictional Error' 'procedural Fairness' 'disability Discrimination' 'victimisation' 'ombudsman Immunity' 'leave to Proceed in Ncat']

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

Judicial Review of Decisions of the New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal / Summons Seeking Judicial Review With Application for Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether an extension of time should be granted to file the summons seeking judicial review.' "Whether the plaintiff established reviewable error in the Tribunal's 26 July 2021 orders refusing to appoint a guardian ad litem and making procedural orders." "Whether the plaintiff established error of law, jurisdictional error, irrelevant consideration, failure to consider relevant considerations, or denial of procedural fairness in the Tribunal's 17 March 2022 refusal to grant leave to proceed with disability discrimination and victimisation complaints." "Whether it was necessary to determine the first defendant's reliance on s 35A of the Ombudsman Act 1974 (NSW)."]

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff was granted an extension of time, but the summons was dismissed because she did not establish any reviewable error in either Tribunal decision. The challenge to the 2021 orders was unsupported and unsubstantiated. As to the refusal decision, the Tribunal recognised the plaintiff's disabilities, applied the leave principles, considered the relevant issues, and found no evidence that the Ombudsman's conduct was discriminatory or that the discrimination and victimisation complaints had reasonable prospects of success. The plaintiff's allegations relied on merits arguments and unsupported assertions rather than jurisdictional error, error of law, relevant/irrelevant...

Court Disposition

Extension of time granted; summons dismissed; plaintiff ordered to pay the first defendant's costs; specified motions dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Grant an extension of time to file the summons seeking judicial review.' 'The summons is dismissed.' "The plaintiff is to pay the first defendant's costs." 'The motions filed 30 March 2023, 27 April 2023, and 27 October 2023 are dismissed.']