Z v University of A, Dr D and Professor E [2003] NSWADT 258

Z v University of A, Dr D and Professor E [2003] NSWADT 258

Because the applicant withdrew his complaint and the Tribunal dismissed it under s 111(1A) of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977, the Tribunal was not persuaded that special circumstances justified ordering the applicant to pay the respondents' costs; accordingly, no order for costs was made.

Parties
Applicant: Z; First Respondent: University of A; Second Respondent: Dr D; Third Respondent: Professor E
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 December 2003
Procedural Posture
Costs Application / Post Dismissal of Complaint
Outcome
Complaint and costs application both dismissed.
Legal Topics
Costs, Withdrawal of Complaint, Dismissal of Complaint
Anti Discrimination Administrative Law Costs Withdrawal of Complaint Dismissal of Complaint

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Z

Applicant

University of A

First Respondent

Dr D

Second Respondent

Professor E

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Costs Application / Post Dismissal of Complaint

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether, upon dismissal of an anti-discrimination complaint after withdrawal by the applicant, the Tribunal should order the applicant to pay costs under s 111(2) of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977.

Ratio Decidendi

Because the applicant withdrew his complaint and the Tribunal dismissed it under s 111(1A) of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977, the Tribunal was not persuaded that special circumstances justified ordering the applicant to pay the respondents' costs; accordingly, no order for costs was made.

Court Disposition

Complaint and costs application both dismissed.

Orders

  • The complaint is dismissed under s 111(1A) of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977.
  • The costs' application is dismissed.