Westwood v Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission [2004] FCA 153

Westwood v Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission [2004] FCA 153

The Court refused to extend time because the applicant gave no satisfactory explanation for the approximately 12-year delay, had been made aware of judicial review avenues in 1991 and 1992, proposed grounds largely attacked the weight given to evidence rather than identifying reviewable error or viable denial of procedural fairness, and the long delay would cause substantial prejudice to the second and third respondents through faded memories, unavailable witnesses and the burden of relitigating old events.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 February 2004
Procedural Posture
Application for an Extension of Time to Seek Administrative Review Under the Administrative Decisions (judicial Review) Act 1977 (cth) / Application for Leave to Extend Time, Filed About 12 Years After the HREOC Decision
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs payable by the applicant to the second and third respondents.
Legal Topics
['extension of Time for Judicial Review' 'procedural Fairness' 'sex Discrimination Complaint' 'delay and Prejudice' 'suppression Orders']
['administrative Law' 'human Rights and Discrimination Law' 'federal Court Procedure'] ['extension of Time for Judicial Review' 'procedural Fairness' 'sex Discrimination Complaint' 'delay and Prejudice' 'suppression Orders']

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

Application for an Extension of Time to Seek Administrative Review Under the Administrative Decisions (judicial Review) Act 1977 (cth) / Application for Leave to Extend Time, Filed About 12 Years After the HREOC Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time under s 11(1) of the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth) to seek review of the HREOC decision made on 31 January 1991.' 'Whether the applicant provided a satisfactory explanation for the very long delay in commencing judicial review proceedings.' 'Whether the proposed grounds, framed as denial of procedural fairness and failure to give sufficient weight to matters, disclosed a viable basis for administrative review.' 'Whether the second and third respondents would suffer prejudice if the extension of time were granted.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court refused to extend time because the applicant gave no satisfactory explanation for the approximately 12-year delay, had been made aware of judicial review avenues in 1991 and 1992, proposed grounds largely attacked the weight given to evidence rather than identifying reviewable error or viable denial of procedural fairness, and the long delay would cause substantial prejudice to the second and third respondents through faded memories, unavailable witnesses and the burden of relitigating old events.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs payable by the applicant to the second and third respondents.

Orders

  • ['Application dismissed.' 'The applicant to pay the costs of the second and third respondents of the application.' 'The order of the Court made on 24 July 2003, as corrected, be continued: pursuant to s 50 of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976, the name of the third respondent, and any published material that...