Braiding v Charles Sturt University [2016] NSWCATAD 90

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Braiding v Charles Sturt University [2016] NSWCATAD 90 Hearing dates: 15 March 2016 Date of orders: 12 May 2016 Decision date: 12 May 2016 Jurisdiction: Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division Before: N Hennessy LCM, Deputy President Decision: The complaints are dismissed. Catchwords: SUMMARY DISMISSAL – whether complaint of disability discrimination should be dismissed for want of prosecution, lacking in substance or failing to disclose a contravention of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW) Legislation Cited: Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW), ss 49B, 49L, 50, 52, 55, 92, 93C, 94A, 102 and 103 Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW), ss 36, 38 and 55(1)(d) Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), s 56. Strata Schemes Management Act 1996 (NSW) Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), r 12.7 Cases Cited: AB v State New South Wales [2014] NSWSC 81 Barwick CJ in General Steel Industries Inc v Commissioner for Railways (NSW) [1964] HCA 69; (1964) 112 CLR 125 Birkett v James [1978] AC 297 Braiding v Charles Sturt University [2015] NSWCATAD 242 Dank v Cronulla Sutherland District Rugby League Football Club Ltd [2014] NSWCA 288 Green v Healthscope Ltd (t/as Hills Private Hospital) [2015] NSWCA 325 Hoser v Hartcher [1999] NSWSC 527 Owners Corporation of Strata Plan 4521 v Zouk [2007] NSWCA 23 Razaghi v Director-General, NSW Department of Health & Anor [2002] NSWADT 4 State of New South Wales v Plaintiff A [2012] NSWCA 248 Walker v State of New South Wales [2003] NSWADT 13 Witten v Lombard Australia Ltd (1968) 88 WN (Pt 1) (NSW) 405 Texts Cited: Bernard Carins, Australian Civil Procedure (10th edition, Thomson Reuters) at 504 Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: Gerard Braiding (Applicant) Charles Sturt University (Respondent) Representation: Applicant (self-represented) L Murrell (Charles Sturt University) (Respondent) File Number(s): 1510081 Publication restriction: nil