NSW Caselaw
Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Wolf Matthews v Secretary, Department of Education [2022] NSWCATAD 173 Hearing dates: 2 December 2021 Date of orders: 2 December 2021 Decision date: 30 May 2022 Jurisdiction: Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division Before: D Dinnen, Senior Member Decision: Leave granted pursuant to s 96(1) of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW) for the complaint against the Respondents to proceed. Catchwords: HUMAN RIGHTS — discrimination — equal opportunity — racial discrimination – racial vilification – victimisation - leave required for complaint to proceed — whether complaint lacking in substance – whether redress sufficient or appropriate – whether a 'public act' - principles applying to grant of leave Legislation Cited: Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 Cases Cited: Alghofaili v SAE Institute Pty Ltd [2020] NSWCATAD 215 Bassili v The Star Pty Ltd [2016] NSWCATAD 167 Chalker v Murrays Australia Pty Ltd [2016] NSWCATAD 282 Commissioner of Corrective Services v Aldridge (EOD) [2000] NSWADTAP 5 Dutt v Central Coast Area Health Service [2002] NSWADT 133 Ekermawi v Administrative Decisions Tribunal of New South Wales [2009] NSWSC 143 Hubbard v Roads and Traffic Authority of NSW [2010] NSWADT 99 Jones v Ekermawi [2009] NSWCA 388 Lamb v Campbell [2021] NSWCATAD 103 Langley v Niland [1981] 2 NSWLR 104 Nicholls and Nicholls v Director General, Department of Education and Training (No 2) [2009] NSWADTAP 20 Prakash v Bobb Borg Enterprises Pty Ltd [1999] NSWADT 73 Purvis v State of New South Wales [2003] HCA 62; (2003) 217 CLR 92 Riley v State of NSW (Department of Education) [2019] NSWCATAD 223 Seltsam Pty Ltd v McGuiness [2000] NSWCA 29; (2000) 49 NSWLR 262 Waters v Public Transport Corporation (1991) 173 CLR 349 Texts Cited: None cited Category: Procedural rulings Parties: Debbie Wolf Matthews on behalf of Nikita Wolf (Applicant) Secretary, Department of Education (First Respondent) James Anderson (Second Respondent) Representation: Counsel: E Jones (Applicant)
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