Harding -v- Vice Chancellor, University of New South Wales [2003] NSWADT 75

CITATION: Harding -v- Vice Chancellor, University of New South Wales [2003] NSWADT 75 DIVISION: Equal Opportunity Division APPLICANT PARTIES: Kathleen Harding RESPONDENT Vice Chancellor, University of New South Wales FILE NUMBER: 021086 HEARING DATES: 10/03/2003, 11/03/2003 SUBMISSIONS CLOSED: 03/11/2003 DATE OF DECISION: 04/15/2003

BEFORE: Hennessy N - Magistrate (Deputy President); McDonald O - Member; Weule B - Member APPLICATION: Dismissal of complaint - frivolous, vexatious, misconceived or lacking in substance MATTER FOR DECISION: Principal matter LEGISLATION CITED : Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 Harding -v- Vice Chancellor, University of New South Wales [2001] NSWADT 205 Harding v Vice Chancellor, University of New South Wales (EOD) [2002] NSWADTAP 36 Harding v University of New South Wales [2002] NSWCA 325 Crewdson -v- Niland & Ors (EOD) [2002] NSWADTAP 5 Armour v Bate [1891] 2 QB 223 Re Orrell Colliery & Fire Bricks Co (1879) 12 ChD 681 Re South American & Mexican Co; Ex parte Bank of England [1895] 1 Ch 37 Crotty v Clarke [1895] 22 VLR 594 Kok Koong v Leong Cheong Kweng Mines [1964] AC 993 Langley v Niland & Anor: [1981] 2 NSWLR 104 Reyes-Gonzales v Sydney Institute of Technology (1998) NSWEOT (6 March 1998) CASES CITED: State Electricity Commission of Victoria v Rabel [1998] 1 VR 102 Karekar v TAFE Commission of NSW [2000] NSWADT 187 General Steel Industries Inc v Commissioner for Railways (NSW) 1964 112 CLR 125 Tannock v State of New South Wales (1999) NSWADT 31 Blair v Curran (1939) 62 CLR 464 French v Sydney Turf Club & Anor [1999] NSWCA 195 Blair v Curran (1939) 62 CLR 464 Harding -v- Vice Chancellor, University of New South Wales [2001] NSWADT 205 Tu -v- University of Sydney (No. 2) (EOD) [2002] NSWADTAP 25 Sivananthan v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Service [2002] NSWADT 45 Crewdson v President, Anti-Discrimination Board [2000] NSWADT 60 APPLICANT REPRESENTATION: No appearance RESPONDENT J Oakley, barrister ORDERS: 1. Complaint dismissed; 2. Complainant to pay the respondent's costs as agreed. If the parties are unable to agree on the amount of costs, it is to be determined by a costs assessor in accordance with the Legal Profession Act 1987.