Hastwell v Kott Gunning [2017] FCA 1557

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Hastwell v Kott Gunning [2017] FCA 1557 File number: NSD 714 of 2017

Judge: BROMWICH J

Date of judgment: 21 December 2017

Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – interlocutory application seeking summary dismissal on basis of asserted lack of jurisdiction to hear matter – proceedings arising from terminated complaint to Australian Human Rights Commission (HRC) – whether valid complaint was made to HRC – whether required commonality exists between respondent to complaint and respondent to court proceedings – whether s 46PO preconditions for Federal Court to hear matter were made out – held: valid complaint was made to HRC – held: respondent to court proceedings same as respondent to HRC complaint – held: s 46PO preconditions made out granting Court jurisdiction – interlocutory application dismissed PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – what is required to sufficiently identify a complaint respondent – complaint taken as at time of termination – partnership able to be identified in complaint to HRC by short form firm name – HRC complaint not bound by rules applicable to a pleading

Legislation: Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth) s 2C Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (Cth) ss 3, 20(2)(iib), 46PH(1), 46PO(1), (2), (3), (4), 46PR Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth) Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth) Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) r 9.41 Partnership Act 1985 (WA) s 10

Cases cited: Devane v Gati (1956) 95 CLR 174 Dye v Commonwealth Securities Ltd (No 2) [2010] FCAFC 118; 63 AILR 101-302 Eliezer v University of Sydney [2015] FCA 1045 Grigor-Scott v Jones [2008] FCAFC 14; 168 FCR 450 Oorlof v Lee [2004] FMCA 893 Simundic v University of Newcastle [2007] FCAFC 144