Commissioner of Corrective Services -v- Aldridge (EOD) [2000] NSWADTAP 5

Appeal Panel

CITATION: Commissioner of Corrective Services -v- Aldridge (EOD) [2000] NSWADTAP 5 APPELLANT Commissioner of Corrective Services, Department of Corrective Services PARTIES: RESPONDENT Richard Aldridge FILE NUMBER: 999007 HEARING DATES: 14/12/99 SUBMISSIONS CLOSED: 12/14/1999 DATE OF DECISION: 04/18/2000

Principal matter DECISION UNDER APPEAL: BEFORE: Hennessy N (Deputy President); Rees N - Judicial Member; Mooney L - Member CATCHWORDS: adequacy of reasons - jurisdiction - leave to extend to the merits - no evidence - opportunity to be heard MATTER FOR DECISION: Principal matter FILE NUMBER UNDER APPEAL: 37 of 1997 DATE OF DECISION UNDER APPEAL: 05/25/1999 LEGISLATION CITED : Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 Aazzopardi -v- Tasman UEB Industries Ltd [1985] 4 NSWLR 139 Soulemezis -v- Dudley (Holdings) Pty Ltd (1987) 10 NSWLR 247 Waterhouse -v- Bell (1991) 25 NSWLR 99 Waters -v- Public Transport Corporation (1991) 173 CLR 349 James -v- Eastleigh Borough Council [1990] 2 AC 751 Boehringer Ingelheim Pty Ltd -v- Reddrop [1984] 2 NSWLR 13 Director-General of Education -v- Breen [1982] 2 IR 93 CASES CITED: Waters -v- Public Transport Corporation (1991) 173 CLR 349 IW -v- City of Perth (1997) 71 ALJR 943 R -v- Birmingham City Council; ex parte Equal Opportunities Commission [1989] AC 1155 Ardeshirian -v- Robe River Iron Associates (1990) EOC 92-299 Metwally -v- University of Wollongong (1984) EOC 92-030 Rugema -v- Gadsten Pty Ltd t/a Southcorp Packaging (1997) EOC 92-887 State of Victoria -v- McKenna [1999] VSC 310 Turnbull -v- NSW Medical Board [1976] 2 NSWLR 281 APPELLANT REPRESENTATION: P Menzies QC with T Anderson, barrister RESPONDENT R Beech-Jones, barrister ORDERS: 1.Appeal on error of law allowed.; 2.Grant leave for the appeal to extend to a review of the merits of the appealable decision.; 3.Set aside the decision and orders made by the Equal Opportunity Division of the Tribunal on 25 May 1999.; 4.In place of that decision and orders, and subject to paragraph 5 of these orders, order that the complaints of discrimination on the grounds of race and disability be dismissed.; 5. That part of the decision of the Tribunal which deals with that portion of the complaint of racial discrimination which makes allegations of abuse directed by Mr Woodham to the Complainant at a meeting on 23 August 1995 be reviewed on the merits.; 6. The parties be afforded the opportunity to make submissions to this Appeal Panel concerning the final orders (if any) which should be made in relation to the complaint of victimisation.; 7. The matters referred to in paragraphs 5 and 6 of these orders be relisted for hearing before this Appeal Panel.; 8. Matter to be relisted for Directions before the presiding member of the Appeal Panel on a date to be fixed by the Registrar.; 9. No order as to costs.