Frost v TAFE NSW (No 2) [2019] NSWCATAD 129

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Frost v TAFE NSW (No 2) [2019] NSWCATAD 129 Hearing dates: On the papers Date of orders: 01 July 2019 Decision date: 01 July 2019 Jurisdiction: Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division Before: A Britton, Principal Member Decision: The application for an order under s 64 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) prohibiting the disclosure of Julie Frost's name, is refused. Catchwords: Practice and procedure – principles applying to power to make confidentiality orders Legislation Cited: Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW) Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) Cases Cited: Carroll v Tokdogan [2015] NSWCATAD 200 DLH v Nationwide News Pty Ltd [2018] NSWCATAD 92 John Fairfax Group Pty Ltd v Local Court of New South Wales (1991) 26 NSWLR 131 State of New South Wales (Justice Health) v Dezfouli [2008] NSWADTAP 69 Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: Julie Frost (applicant) TAFE NSW (respondent) Representation: In person (applicant) Minter Ellison (respondent) File Number(s): 2018/00161029 Publication restriction: These reasons must not be published on Caselaw until 28 days after the date of this decision.

REASONS FOR DECISION 1. The President of the Anti-Discrimination Board referred to NCAT a complaint made by Julie Frost about TAFE NSW, alleging she had been discriminated against in the area of education on the ground of disability (the Complaint). 2. Since the referral of the Complaint, the Tribunal has made a number of procedural orders, including an order made on 18 March 2019 striking out parts of the Points of Claim filed by Ms Frost. 3. Pursuant to s 62 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) (NCAT Act), Ms Frost requested written reasons for the strike out order. On 12 April 2019, the Registrar provided TAFE and Ms Frost with a copy of the reasons for that decision and advised that it would be published on Caselaw. Ms Frost immediately emailed the Registrar demanding an explanation for the decision to publish the reasons and asserting that the foreshadowed publication would have the result of "stigmatising [my] mental illness publicly". 4. The Registrar decided to treat Ms Frost's email of 12 April 2019 as an application for an order prohibiting the publication of her name. In addition, the Registrar decided not to publish the reasons for the strike out decision on Caselaw until that application had been determined by the Tribunal. 5. For the reasons that follow, I have decided to refuse Ms Frost's application for an order prohibiting the disclosure of her name in these proceedings.