Liria v Papuan Oil Search Ltd [2012] NSWADT 73

Administrative Decisions Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Liria v Papuan Oil Search Ltd [2012] NSWADT 73 Hearing dates: 28 March 2012 Decision date: 26 April 2012 Jurisdiction: Equal Opportunity Division Before: Magistrate N Hennessy, Deputy President Decision: Leave for the complaint of race discrimination to proceed is refused Leave for the complaint of victimisation to proceed is refused. Catchwords: LEAVE - complaints of race discrimination and victimisation declined as lacking in substance - whether fair and just to grant leave for complaints to proceed - extra-territorial effect of Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 - merits of complaints Legislation Cited: Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 Interpretation Act 1987 Cases Cited: Jones and Anor v Ekermawi [2009] NSWCA 388 Wanganui-Rangitikei Electric Power Board v Australian Provident Society (1934) 50 CLR 581 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Luke Liria (Applicant) Papuan Oil Search Ltd (Respondent) Representation: L Liria (Applicant in person) Harmers Workplace Lawyers (Respondent) File Number(s): 111132

REasons for decision

Introduction 1The issue in these proceedings is whether the Tribunal should give Mr Liria permission for his complaints of race discrimination and victimisation under the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (AD Act) to proceed. The complaints, which are against his former employer, Papuan Oil Search Ltd (Oil Search), were declined by the President of the Anti-Discrimination Board. As Mr Liria lives in Papua New Guinea, the application for leave was determined 'on the papers': Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997, s 76. 2The Tribunal has discretion to grant or refuse leave for the complaints to go ahead and will be guided by what is fair and just in the circumstances: Jones and Anor v Ekermawi [2009] NSWCA 388. When deciding whether to grant leave, the Tribunal may have regard to the grounds on which the President may decline a complaint under s 92(1) of the AD Act, including that the conduct, if proven, would not disclose a contravention of the AD Act. I have decided to refuse leave for the complaints to proceed.