Qantas Airways Limited v Lustig [2015] FCA 253

Qantas Airways Limited v Lustig [2015] FCA 253

VCAT is not a 'court of a State' for Chapter III purposes and cannot be vested with or exercise federal judicial power, including determining matters in federal jurisdiction. Because Qantas relied on a federal statutory defence, the proceedings in VCAT were federal in nature. As such, VCAT had no jurisdiction and could not transfer the proceedings to any court under s 77 of the VCAT Act; it could only dismiss them.

Parties
Applicant: Qantas Airways Limited; First Respondent: Peter Lustig; Second Respondent: Giuseppe De Simone; Third Respondent: Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal; Intervener: Attorney-General of Victoria
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 March 2015
Procedural Posture
Application for Declaration and Prohibition / Judgment at First Instance
Outcome
VCAT lacks jurisdiction; declaration granted; writ of prohibition issued; costs reserved
Legal Topics
Federal Versus State Jurisdiction, Judicial Power Under Constitution, Powers of State Tribunals, Prohibition and Dismissal of Proceedings
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Civil Procedure Federal Versus State Jurisdiction Judicial Power Under Constitution Powers of State Tribunals Prohibition and Dismissal of Proceedings

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Qantas Airways Limited

Applicant

Peter Lustig

First Respondent

Giuseppe De Simone

Second Respondent

Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal

Third Respondent

Attorney-General of Victoria

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Application for Declaration and Prohibition / Judgment at First Instance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether VCAT is a 'court of a State' within s 77(iii) of the Constitution and can exercise federal judicial power
  2. 2 Whether VCAT has jurisdiction to hear proceedings arising under federal law due to a federal defence
  3. 3 Whether VCAT can transfer such proceedings to the Supreme Court of Victoria

Ratio Decidendi

VCAT is not a 'court of a State' for Chapter III purposes and cannot be vested with or exercise federal judicial power, including determining matters in federal jurisdiction. Because Qantas relied on a federal statutory defence, the proceedings in VCAT were federal in nature. As such, VCAT had no jurisdiction and could not transfer the proceedings to any court under s 77 of the VCAT Act; it could only dismiss them.

Court Disposition

VCAT lacks jurisdiction; declaration granted; writ of prohibition issued; costs reserved

Orders

  • The Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal lacks jurisdiction to entertain the applications made by the first and second respondents in proceedings C2022/2012 and C2377/2012.
  • A writ of prohibition issue restraining the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal from taking any further step in proceedings C2022/2012 and C2377/2012 other than making orders for the dismissal of the proceedings and costs.