Williams, Kevin v The President, Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission & Anor [1998] FCA 1325

Williams, Kevin v The President, Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission & Anor [1998] FCA 1325

The applicant's complaints were made more than twelve months after the alleged acts of discrimination. The relevant statutory provisions did not authorise inquiry into such complaints, and no error of law occurred in confirming the decisions to cease inquiry. No apprehended bias was established, and the extension of time for review applications was refused as there was no merit in the substantive applications.

Parties
Applicant: Kevin Williams; First Respondent: The President, Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission; Second Respondent: Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 October 1998
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Application / Decision on Application for Extension of Time and Merits Review
Outcome
Application for extension of time refused; review applications dismissed.
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Extension of Time, Apprehended Bias, Delegation of Powers, Sex Discrimination, Racial Discrimination
Administrative Law Human Rights Law Discrimination Law Judicial Review Extension of Time Apprehended Bias Delegation of Powers Sex Discrimination +1 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 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kevin Williams

Applicant

The President, Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission

First Respondent

Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Application / Decision on Application for Extension of Time and Merits Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether applicant's complaints were lodged within statutory time limits
  2. 2 Whether extensions of time to seek review should be granted
  3. 3 Whether an apprehension of bias affected decisions

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant's complaints were made more than twelve months after the alleged acts of discrimination. The relevant statutory provisions did not authorise inquiry into such complaints, and no error of law occurred in confirming the decisions to cease inquiry. No apprehended bias was established, and the extension of time for review applications was refused as there was no merit in the substantive applications.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time refused; review applications dismissed.

Orders

  • The application for an extension of time within which to lodge the application with the Registry of the Court be refused.