Lloyd -v- Veterinary Surgeons Investigating Committee (GD) [2001] NSWADTAP 26
The Panel found that 'reconsidered' in s 79(3) of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 does not mandate a hearing de novo when parties do not consent to reconstitution. The President’s discretionary directions, including allowing the new member to review records and inviting submissions, were lawful, within the Tribunal’s power, and consistent with procedural fairness and natural justice.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 15 August 2001
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Final Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- ['reconstitution of Tribunal' 'procedural Fairness' 'natural Justice' 'tribunal Procedure']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Proper construction of s 79(3) of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 regarding tribunal reconstitution' 'Power of tribunal or its President to direct procedure for hearings after reconstitution' 'Whether procedure determined offended rules of natural justice and caused procedural unfairness']
Ratio Decidendi
The Panel found that 'reconsidered' in s 79(3) of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 does not mandate a hearing de novo when parties do not consent to reconstitution. The President’s discretionary directions, including allowing the new member to review records and inviting submissions, were lawful, within the Tribunal’s power, and consistent with procedural fairness and natural justice.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- ['Appeal dismissed' 'Directions of the President of 27 July 2000 are confirmed']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment