Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Cumaiyi v Northern Territory of Australia [2020] FCA 1299 File number: NTD 36 of 2019
Judgment of: WHITE J
Date of judgment: 9 September 2020
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application pursuant to r 16.21 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) to have certain parts of the Amended Statement of Claim (ASC) struck out – whether ASC pleads matters going beyond those permitted by s 46PO(3) of the Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (Cth) – consideration of s 46PO(3) – whether the time period of the conduct alleged in the ASC goes beyond that contained in the Complaint to the Australian Human Rights Commission. Held: application upheld in part.
Legislation: Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (Cth) ss 3(1), 46P, 46PA, 46PF, 46PH, 46PI, 46PJ-46PK, 46PO, 46PR Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) Human Rights Legislation Amendment Act 2017 (Cth) Human Rights Legislation Amendment Act (No. 1) 1999 (Cth) Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth) ss 9, 13 Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth) s 50 Federal Court Rules (2011) (Cth) r 16.21 Human Rights Legislation Amendment Bill 1998
Cases cited: Charles v Fuji Xerox Australia Pty Ltd [2000] FCA 1531; (2000) 105 FCR 573 Commonwealth v Sex Discrimination Commissioner [1998] FCA 1607; (1998) 90 FCR 179 Dye v Commonwealth Securities Ltd [2010] FCA 720 Dye v Commonwealth Securities Limited (No 2) [2010] FCAFC 118 Grigor-Scott v Jones [2008] FCAFC 14; (2008) 168 FCR 450 Haile-Michael v Konstantinidis (No 2) [2012] FCA 167 Haraksin v Murrays Australia Limited (No 2) [2013] FCA 217; (2013) 211 FCR 1 Hastwell v Kott Gunning [2017] FCA 1557 Huang v University of New South Wales [2014] FCA 1337 King v Jetstar Airways Pty Ltd (No 2) [2012] FCA 8; (2012) 286 ALR 149 Maghiar v State of Western Australia [2002] FCA 262 Simplot Australia Pty Ltd v Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (1996) 69 FCR 90 Stepien v Department of Human Services [2018] FCA 1062 Travers v New South Wales [2000] FCA 1565 Yanunijarra Aboriginal Corporation RNTBC v State of Western Australia [2020] FCAFC 64
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate