NSW Caselaw
CITATION: Mitchell v Clayton Utz and Ors (No 2)[ [2010] NSWADT 59
DIVISION: Equal Opportunity Division
APPLICANT Michael Mitchell
RESPONDENTS: Clayton Utz PARTIES: Garth Williams Jamie Taylor Sonia Goumenis Katie Best Trevor Robinson Joseph Catanzariti Narelle Rutz
FILE NUMBER: 091046
HEARING DATES: On the papers
SUBMISSIONS CLOSED: 27 January 2010
DATE OF DECISION: 26 February 2010
BEFORE: Hennessy N - Magistrate (Deputy President)
CATCHWORDS: Application to correct decision - inconsistency between decision and statement of reasons - Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 s 87
LEGISLATION CITED : Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1977 Anti-Discrimination Act 1977
CASES CITED: Mitchell v Clayton Utz & Ors [2009] NSWADT 266
APPLICANT In person REPRESENTATION: RESPONDENT M Byrnes, solicitor
ORDERS: The following order of the Tribunal, made on 13 October 2009 is corrected by adding the words in italics:Leave is granted for the following complaints or parts of complaints to proceed:c) the complaints of sexual harassment against Mr Williams and Mr Taylor personally and against Clayton Utz as their employer in relation to the alleged conduct except for (i) allegations that Mr Williams or Mr Taylor called Mr Mitchell 'trench' or 'trench coat' unless that conduct was accompanied by conduct of a sexual nature; (ii)the comment alleged to have been made by Mr Williams that 'solicitors could take paralegals home for sex'
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