Bentley v Coleman (EOD) [2002] NSWADTAP 38

Bentley v Coleman (EOD) [2002] NSWADTAP 38

The Appeal Panel found that Mr Bentley had been given adequate notice of the hearing dates by means of registered post and delivery to his last known address, and that his deliberate actions to avoid receipt of mail did not constitute a denial of procedural fairness. Accordingly, there was no breach of procedural fairness.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 November 2002
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Decision of Appeal Panel
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['procedural Fairness' 'adequate Notice' 'sexual Harassment']
['administrative Law' 'anti Discrimination'] ['procedural Fairness' 'adequate Notice' 'sexual Harassment']

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

Appeal / Decision of Appeal Panel

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Mr Bentley was given adequate notice of the hearing and afforded procedural fairness']

Ratio Decidendi

The Appeal Panel found that Mr Bentley had been given adequate notice of the hearing dates by means of registered post and delivery to his last known address, and that his deliberate actions to avoid receipt of mail did not constitute a denial of procedural fairness. Accordingly, there was no breach of procedural fairness.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed']