Bradley -v- State of New South Wales [2002] NSWADT 11

CITATION: Bradley -v- State of New South Wales [2002] NSWADT 11 DIVISION: Equal Opportunity Division APPLICANT PARTIES: David Bradley RESPONDENT State of New South Wales FILE NUMBER: 25 of 1998 HEARING DATES: 08/10/2001 SUBMISSIONS CLOSED: 10/08/2001 DATE OF DECISION: 02/01/2002

BEFORE: Hennessy N (Deputy President); Mooney L - Member; Lau L - Member APPLICATION: Dismissal of complaint - frivolous, vexatious, misconceived or lacking in substance - Joinder of parties MATTER FOR DECISION: Preliminary matter Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 LEGISLATION CITED : Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 Crown Proceedings Act 1988 Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth) Crewdson -v- New South Wales Health Department Medical Appeals Panel (EOD) [2001] NSWADTAP 11 Wentworth v Wentworth & Ors [2000] NSWCA 350 Rajski v Powell (1987) 11 NSWLR 522 Sirros v Moore & Ors [1975] 1QB 118 Tredinnick -v- Wentworth Area Health Service [2000] NSWADT 172 Assal v Department of Health Housing and Community Services (1992) EOC 92-409 State Electricity Commission of Victoria v Rabel & Ors (1998) 1 VR 102 Reyes-Gonzalez v Sydney Institute of Technology (1998) NSWEOT (6 March 1998) CASES CITED: Prakash v Bobb Borg Enterprises Pty Ltd [1999] NSWADT 73 Khan v Macquarie University and Webster [1999] NSW ADT 100 Langley v Niland & Anor at 107 General Steel Industries Inc v Commissioner for Railways (NSW) 1964 112 CLR 125 Tannock v State of New South Wales [1999] NSWADT 31 (11 May 1999) Ravel v Plastral Fidence Pty Ltd [1999] NSWADT 18 Australian Iron and Steel Pty Ltd v Banovic (1989) 168 CLR 165 Waters v Public Transport Corporation (1991) EOC 92 390 British Columbia (Public Service Employee Relations Commission) v The Government of the Province of British Columbia as represented by the Public Service Employee Relations Commission [1999] 3 SCR 3 Scott & Anor v Telstra Corporation Limited (1995) EOC 92-717 Druett and Cooper v State of New South Wales No H99/6 and H98/70, Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, 17 April 2000 APPLICANT REPRESENTATION: In person RESPONDENT C Ronalds, barrister ORDERS: 1. The applicant's application to join the Director General, Attorney General's Department as a party to these proceedings is refused.; 2. The respondent's application that the complaint be dismissed is refused.; 3.The matter to be listed for hearing in consultation with the Registrar.