Karacakoylu v Sisbro Investments Pty Ltd [2015] NSWCATAD 236

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Karacakoylu v Sisbro Investments Pty Ltd [2015] NSWCATAD 236 Hearing dates: 22 September 2015 Date of orders: 13 November 2015 Decision date: 13 November 2015 Jurisdiction: Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division Before: Hennessy LCM, Deputy President Decision: Leave is refused for the complaint of race discrimination lodged by Mr Karacakoylu to proceed. Catchwords: ANTI-DISCRIMINATION – leave to proceed when complaint declined as lacking in substance - complaint of race discrimination against real estate agency - whether fair and just for complaint to proceed – complaint lacks merit – leave refused Legislation Cited: Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW) Cases Cited: Dutt v Central Coast Area Health Service [2002] NSWADT 133 Ekermawi v Administrative Decisions Tribunal of New South Wales [2009] NSWSC 143 IW v City of Perth [1997] HCA 30; (1997) 191 CLR 1 Seltsam Pty Ltd v McGuiness [2000] NSWCA 29; (2000) 49 NSWLR 262 Waters v Public Transport Corporation [1991] HCA 49; (1991) 173 CLR 349 Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: Ecran Karacakoylu (Applicant) Sisbro Investments Pty Ltd t/as Century 21 Southwest Fairfield (Respondent) Representation: E Karacakoylu (Applicant in person) N Dilles (Licensee of Respondent) File Number(s): 1510451 Publication restriction: Nil

reasons for decision

Introduction 1. Mr Karacakoylu, who is of Turkish ethnic background, complains of race discrimination against a real estate agent, Century 21 Southwest Fairfield. Mr Karacakoylu was a tenant of a property managed by Century 21. 2. The complaint is that from 3 November 2014 to 18 December 2014 Century 21 breached the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW) through the actions of its employee, Ms Sirol. The conduct about which Mr Karacakoylu complains is: 1. refusing to send him a copy of the inspection report and the accompanying photographs within 7 days; and 2. failing to forward the paper work to Fair Trading promptly so that he could receive 50% of the bond as agreed. 1. According to Mr Karacakoylu, these were two "illegal actions" which were perpetrated because of his nationality. As a consequence of this conduct, Mr Karacakoylu says that he has been experiencing anxiety and difficulty sleeping. He says he needed to take a week off work. 2. The President of the Anti-Discrimination Board declined the complaint on the basis that it was lacking in substance: Anti-Discrimination Act, s 92(1)(a). When that happens, the complainant must apply to the Tribunal for permission or 'leave' for the complaint to go ahead: Anti-Discrimination Act, s 96. I have refused leave in this case because the complaint lacks substance and it is not fair and just for it to proceed.