Lee v Greyhound Racing Authority [2004] NSWSC 69

Lee v Greyhound Racing Authority [2004] NSWSC 69

The stewards' memorandum of 11 September 1996 was a clear termination of the inquiry: it stated that the stewards had finalised their inquiry, were unable to substantiate charges, had exhausted all avenues available to them, and had handed down their decision. Although others within the Control Board may have wished to keep the inquiry alive, the stewards had already terminated it. The appropriate relief was therefore a declaration that the inquiry had concluded, not mandamus requiring its reconvening.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 February 2004
Procedural Posture
Application for Statutory Mandamus Under Section 65 Supreme Court Act 1970 (nsw) / Ex Tempore Judgment
Outcome
Declaration made that the inquiry had concluded; no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
['statutory Mandamus' 'greyhound Racing Stewards Inquiry' 'declaratory Relief' 'costs']
['administrative Law'] ['statutory Mandamus' 'greyhound Racing Stewards Inquiry' 'declaratory Relief' 'costs']

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 Statutory Mandamus Under Section 65 Supreme Court Act 1970 (nsw) / Ex Tempore Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Greyhound Racing Authority should be ordered under section 65 of the Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) to reconvene and determine to finality the stewards' inquiry concerning Hua Blue." "Whether the stewards' inquiry had already concluded." 'Whether any relief should be refused because of delay or other discretionary considerations.' 'Whether the inquiry could resume given that one steward was no longer available.']

Ratio Decidendi

The stewards' memorandum of 11 September 1996 was a clear termination of the inquiry: it stated that the stewards had finalised their inquiry, were unable to substantiate charges, had exhausted all avenues available to them, and had handed down their decision. Although others within the Control Board may have wished to keep the inquiry alive, the stewards had already terminated it. The appropriate relief was therefore a declaration that the inquiry had concluded, not mandamus requiring its reconvening.

Court Disposition

Declaration made that the inquiry had concluded; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • ['Declare that the inquiry before Messrs Potter, Howard and Anderson into the positive urine specimen obtained at Singleton on 12 April 1996 has concluded.' 'No order as to costs.']