Jones v Superannuation Complaints Tribunal [2011] FCA 1255

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Jones v Superannuation Complaints Tribunal [2011] FCA 1255 Citation: Jones v Superannuation Complaints Tribunal [2011] FCA 1255

Parties: ROBERT CARLTON JONES v SUPERANNUATION COMPLAINTS TRIBUNAL and STATEWIDE SUPERANNUATION PTY LTD ACN 008 099 223

File number: SAD 92 of 2011

Judge: BESANKO J

Date of judgment: 4 November 2011

Catchwords: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW — application for declaration and writ of mandamus in relation to decision of Superannuation Complaints Tribunal that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the applicant's complaint pursuant to s 14 of the Superannuation (Resolution of Complaints) Act 1993 (Cth) ('SRC Act') because the applicant's complaint had not been made within the prescribed period — where parties accepted that whether complaint was made in prescribed period was jurisdictional fact which Court determines for itself STATUTORY INTERPRETATION — where s 14(3) of SRC Act provided for applicant to be given written notice by the trustee of a superannuation fund of its decision in relation to the payment of a death benefit — where letter giving written notice was posted to applicant's solicitors who had corresponded with trustee on his behalf — where letter was not received by applicant's solicitors — where applicant not advised of trustee's decision until after expiry of prescribed period calculated from date of letter — whether applicant had been given written notice — whether s 29 of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth) ('AI Act') applied to s 14(3) — whether s 14(3) authorised or required a document to be served by post — whether s 28A of the AI Act applied — whether s 28A authorised service by post on the applicant's solicitors — whether non-delivery had been proved Held: The Court declared that the applicant's complaint had been made within the prescribed period.