Bakir v Roads and Maritime Services - [2018] NSWCATAD 69

Civil and Administrative Tribunal

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Bakir v Roads and Maritime Services [2018] NSWCATAD 69
Hearing dates: 7 June 2017, 17 July 2017, 6 September 2017, 9 October 2017, 7 November 2017
Date of orders: 27 March 2018
Decision date: 27 March 2018
Jurisdiction: Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division
Before: D Dinnen, Senior Member
Decision:
The Respondent is to pay the Applicant’s costs from 16 August 2017 as agreed or assessed.

Catchwords: COSTS – special circumstances – evidence as submissions – delay – disadvantage – failure to comply with Tribunal orders
Legislation Cited: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013
Cases Cited: AIN v Medical Council of New South Wales [2015] NSWCATAP 241
BHR and BHS v Biripi Aborignial (sic) Children's Services (No2) [2015] NSWCATAD 109
Ceepee Pty Ltd v Roads and Maritime Services [2015] NSWCATAD 130
Chan v Commissioner for Fair Trading [2015] NSWCATAD 62
CRIPPS and Another v G& M DAWSON Pty Ltd and Another; G & M DAWSON Pty Ltd and Another v CRIPPS and Another [2006] NSWCA 81
Fitzpatrick Investments Pty Limited v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue [2015] NSWCATAD 103
Hadidi v Owners Corporation Strata Plan 84787 [2015] NSWCATAP 74
Kurmond Homes Pty Ltd v Spiteri [2015] NSWCATAP 48
Mahenthirarasa v State Rail Authority of NSW (No 2) [2008] NSWCA 201; 72 NSWLR 273
Yammatree Pty Ltd (Applicant); North West Local Land Service (Respondent) [2015] NSWCATAD 221
Younan v Commissioner for Fair Trading (No 2) [2016] NSWCATOD 60
Category: Costs
Parties: Belal Rateb Bakir (Applicant)
Roads and Maritime Services (Respondent)
Representation:
B Bakir (Applicant in person)

Counsel:
R Davies from 7 November 2017 (Applicant)
Solicitors:
ANB Lawyers and Conveyancers from 31 August 2017 (Applicant)
Smythe Wozniak Lawyers (Respondent)

File Number(s): 2017/00072422

REASONS FOR DECISION

Background

On 7 February 2017, Belal Bakir (“the Applicant”) applied for a renewal of his Wheelchair Accessible Taxi (“WAT”) licence no. 108700 – T3076. On 10 February 2017, Roads and Maritime Services (the Respondent) issued a “Notice of Refusal to Re-Issue” in relation to the Applicant’s application for renewal of his WAT licence, on the basis that “T3076 failed to show preference to persons confined to a wheelchair”.
The Applicant sought review in this Tribunal of the Respondent’s decision by application dated 8 March 2017. On 24 April 2017 the Tribunal made orders for all relevant material to be filed, and listed the matter for hearing on 9 June 2017.
At hearing on 9 June 2017, the Applicant was self-represented and appeared with the assistance of an Arabic interpreter. Mr Wozniak informed the Tribunal that the Respondent had received the Applicant’s evidence on 5 June 2017, instead of by 22 May 2017 as directed, and was therefore unable to adequately deal with it prior to the hearing. The hearing was adjourned to 17 July 2017.
At the resumed hearing on 17 July 2017, the Applicant was self-represented and appeared with the assistance of an Arabic interpreter. The Applicant was affirmed and gave evidence, and was cross-examined by…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Bakir v Roads and Maritime Services and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2018] NSWCATAD 69
Decision Date: 27 March 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Bakir v Roads and Maritime Services, the primary dispute involved the costs incurred by the applicant in relation to a matter heard by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The case was adjudicated by the Federal Court of Australia, specifically in the context of judicial review proceedings.

The legal issues the court was required to address were primarily centred on whether the respondent's failure to comply with the Tribunal's orders and the delay in the proceedings constituted special circumstances warranting an award of costs against the respondent. The applicant argued that the respondent's conduct led to significant delays and disadvantages, thereby justifying an order for costs under the relevant statutory provisions.

The court meticulously examined the evidence and submissions presented, noting the respondent's failure to adhere to the Tribunal's orders and the consequential delays that prejudiced the applicant. The court found that the respondent's conduct indeed met the criteria for special circumstances, as it resulted in significant disadvantage to the applicant and an unnecessary prolongation of the proceedings. Consequently, the court ruled that the respondent should bear the costs incurred by the applicant from a specified date.

In conclusion, the court ordered the respondent to pay the applicant's costs from 16 August 2017, as either agreed upon or assessed, reflecting the respondent's responsibility for the additional costs incurred due to their failure to comply with the Tribunal's orders.

Orders

Orders of the court

The Respondent is to pay the Applicant’s costs from 16 August 2017 as agreed or assessed.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

Medium Neutral Citation:	Bakir v Roads and Maritime Services [2018] NSWCATAD 69
Hearing dates:	7 June 2017, 17 July 2017, 6 September 2017, 9 October 2017, 7 November 2017
Date of orders:	27 March 2018
Decision date:	27 March 2018
Jurisdiction:	Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division
Before:	D Dinnen, Senior Member
Decision:	The Respondent is to pay the Applicant’s costs from 16 August 2017 as agreed or assessed.
Catchwords:	COSTS – special circumstances – evidence as submissions – delay – disadvantage – failure to comply with Tribunal orders
Legislation Cited:	Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013
Cases Cited:	AIN v Medical Council of New South Wales [2015] NSWCATAP 241 BHR and BHS v Biripi Aborignial (sic) Children's Services (No2) [2015] NSWCATAD 109 Ceepee Pty Ltd v Roads and Maritime Services [2015] NSWCATAD 130 Chan v Commissioner for Fair Trading [2015] NSWCATAD 62 CRIPPS and Another v G& M DAWSON Pty Ltd and Another; G & M DAWSON Pty Ltd and Another v CRIPPS and Another [2006] NSWCA 81 Fitzpatrick Investments Pty Limited v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue [2015] NSWCATAD 103 Hadidi v Owners Corporation Strata Plan 84787 [2015] NSWCATAP 74 Kurmond Homes Pty Ltd v Spiteri [2015] NSWCATAP 48 Mahenthirarasa v State Rail Authority of NSW (No 2) [2008] NSWCA 201; 72 NSWLR 273 Yammatree Pty Ltd (Applicant); North West Local Land Service (Respondent) [2015] NSWCATAD 221 Younan v Commissioner for Fair Trading (No 2) [2016] NSWCATOD 60
Category:	Costs
Parties:	Belal Rateb Bakir (Applicant) Roads and Maritime Services (Respondent)
Representation:	B Bakir (Applicant in person) Counsel: R Davies from 7 November 2017 (Applicant) Solicitors: ANB Lawyers and Conveyancers from 31 August 2017 (Applicant) Smythe Wozniak Lawyers (Respondent)
File Number(s):	2017/00072422