Khoury v Kassim [1999] NSWSC 721

Khoury v Kassim [1999] NSWSC 721

Because the plaintiffs (David and Michael Khoury) disputed the Tribunal's jurisdiction and the Referee failed to make a ruling under section 26 of the Act as required, and the evidence supported their entitlement to such a ruling, the Tribunal's determination and order were made in breach of the required procedure and natural justice. Accordingly, the Tribunal's decision and orders must be quashed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 July 1999
Procedural Posture
Prerogative Relief Application / Judgment
Outcome
Tribunal's decision and order of 24 August 1998 quashed.
Legal Topics
['natural Justice' 'procedural Fairness' 'jurisdiction of Tribunal' 'building Claims' 'consumer Claims Tribunal Act']

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

Prerogative Relief Application / Judgment

  1. 1 ['Whether the Referee failed to give a ruling as to jurisdiction after it was disputed under section 26 of the Consumer Claims Tribunal Act 1987' 'Whether there was a denial of natural justice or procedural fairness in the conduct of the Tribunal' 'Whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction where the cross-claim exceeded the prescribed amount']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the plaintiffs (David and Michael Khoury) disputed the Tribunal's jurisdiction and the Referee failed to make a ruling under section 26 of the Act as required, and the evidence supported their entitlement to such a ruling, the Tribunal's determination and order were made in breach of the required procedure and natural justice. Accordingly, the Tribunal's decision and orders must be quashed.

Court Disposition

Tribunal's decision and order of 24 August 1998 quashed.

Orders

  • ["Tribunal's decision and order of 24 August 1998 quashed." 'Parties given the opportunity to make submissions on costs in the light of the judgment.']