Deva v University of Western Sydney [2006] NSWADT 350

Deva v University of Western Sydney [2006] NSWADT 350

Leave was refused because the subject matter of Mr Deva's AIRC application and his Anti-Discrimination Board complaint was the termination of his employment and a remedy for that termination. The subject matter did not change because the termination was later alleged to have been for discriminatory reasons rather...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 December 2006
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Proceed With Discrimination Complaint / Preliminary Matter
Outcome
Leave refused.
Legal Topics
['leave to Proceed Before the Tribunal' 'declined Complaint' 'subject Matter Dealt With by Another Body' 'termination of Employment' 'race, Age and Marital Status Discrimination']
['anti Discrimination Law' 'employment Law' 'administrative Law'] ['leave to Proceed Before the Tribunal' 'declined Complaint' 'subject Matter Dealt With by Another Body' 'termination of Employment' 'race, Age and Marital Status Discrimination']

Source-derived case record

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 Leave to Proceed With Discrimination Complaint / Preliminary Matter

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether leave should be granted for Mr Deva's complaint of discrimination to be the subject of proceedings before the Tribunal after the President of the Anti-Discrimination Board declined the complaint under s 92(1) of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977." "Whether the subject matter of Mr Deva's discrimination complaint had already been dealt with by the Australian Industrial Relations Commission."]

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was refused because the subject matter of Mr Deva's AIRC application and his Anti-Discrimination Board complaint was the termination of his employment and a remedy for that termination. The subject matter did not change because the termination was later alleged to have been for discriminatory reasons rather than harsh, unjust or unreasonable reasons. The matter had been dealt with by the AIRC, and there was no substantial reason to permit further proceedings before the Tribunal.

Court Disposition

Leave refused.

Orders

  • ["Leave for Mr Deva's complaint of discrimination to be the subject of proceedings before the Tribunal is refused."]