NSW Breeding & Racing v Administrative Decisions Tribunal [2001] NSWSC 494

NSW Breeding & Racing v Administrative Decisions Tribunal [2001] NSWSC 494

Given the adequate provision for appeal under Chapter 7 of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 to an Appeal Panel, which offers at least as effective and convenient a remedy as judicial review, and having considered the relevant factors under s.123 and general administrative law principles, the Supreme Court refused to exercise its original jurisdiction in favour of requiring the plaintiff to seek alternative review first.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 June 2001
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Preliminary Question Whether Supreme Court Should Exercise Its Original Jurisdiction or Require the Plaintiff to Pursue Review by an Appeal Panel
Outcome
Application for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
['judicial Review' 'discretion to Refuse Review Where Statutory Appeal Adequate' 'vicarious Liability' 'sex Discrimination' 'sexual Harassment']
['administrative Law'] ['judicial Review' 'discretion to Refuse Review Where Statutory Appeal Adequate' 'vicarious Liability' 'sex Discrimination' 'sexual Harassment']

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 / Preliminary Question Whether Supreme Court Should Exercise Its Original Jurisdiction or Require the Plaintiff to Pursue Review by an Appeal Panel

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Court should refuse to decide a judicial review application because legislation provides an adequate alternative process (Appeal Panel under ADT Act)' 'Whether plaintiff must exhaust internal appeal rights under the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 before seeking judicial review' 'Matters relevant to exercise of discretion under s.123 of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997']

Ratio Decidendi

Given the adequate provision for appeal under Chapter 7 of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 to an Appeal Panel, which offers at least as effective and convenient a remedy as judicial review, and having considered the relevant factors under s.123 and general administrative law principles, the Supreme Court refused to exercise its original jurisdiction in favour of requiring the plaintiff to seek alternative review first.

Court Disposition

Application for judicial review refused

Orders

  • ["Plaintiff's application for judicial review refused" "Plaintiff to pay the defendants' costs of the proceedings"]