Yu v University of Newcastle (EOD) [2012] NSWADTAP 54

Administrative Decisions Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Yu v University of Newcastle (EOD) [2012] NSWADTAP 54 Hearing dates: 13 December 2012 Decision date: 21 December 2012 Jurisdiction: Appeal Panel - Internal Before: Magistrate N Hennessy, Deputy President R Wright SC, Judicial Member Dr J Schneeweiss, Non-Judicial Member Decision: 1. The appeal on a question of law is dismissed. 2. Leave is refused for the appeal to extend to the merits of the Tribunal's decision. 3. The decision of the Tribunal is affirmed. Catchwords: APPEAL - disagreement with factual findings - contradictory evidence - no question of law identified - insufficient basis to extend appeal to merits Legislation Cited: Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Dr Fu Yu (Appellant) University of Newcastle (Respondent) Representation: Counsel R Warren (Respondent) Dr Yu (Appellant in person) Hicksons Lawyers (Respondent) File Number(s): 129036 Decision under appeal Citation: [2012] NSWADT 201 Before: Equal Opportunity Division File Number(s): 111017

REASON FOR DECISION

Introduction 1Dr Yu complained that, while he was a masters student at the University of Newcastle, Professor Rasiah (an employee of the University) discriminated against him in breach of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 on the ground that he is Chinese. The Tribunal dismissed the complaint and Dr Yu has appealed. 2Dr Yu feels seriously aggrieved by Professor Rasiah's conduct and disagrees with the Tribunal's decision. The Appeal Panel accepts and endorses the Tribunal's conclusion that Professor Rasiah's delay of 7 months in providing to Dr Yu the results of his supplementary examinations taken in June 2008 was unacceptable. The Panel also accepts that Dr Yu found it very offensive when Professor Rasiah told him to "speak English" during an interview concerning other examination results, when Dr Yu was speaking English. Such a reaction was in the Panel's view entirely understandable. While Dr Yu feels legitimately aggrieved, it does not follow, however, that the conduct amounted to unlawful discrimination under the Anti-Discrimination Act. 3Dr Yu has been unable to identify any error on a question of law by the Tribunal or to give any sufficient reason for the Appeal Panel to grant permission for his appeal to extend to the merits of the Tribunal's decision. His appeal is dismissed.