Bilaczenko v Financial Ombudsman Service Ltd (No.2)

In the matter of *Bilaczenko v Financial Ombudsman Service Ltd (No.2)*, the applicant, Mr. Bilaczenko, brought proceedings against the respondent, the Financial Ombudsman Service Ltd (FOS). The dispute concerned the applicant's claim that FOS had breached its duty of care to him and had acted in a manner that was procedurally unfair and biased in its handling of his complaint. The proceedings were heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The central legal issues before the Court were whether FOS owed Mr. Bilaczenko a duty of care in its handling of his complaint, and if so, whether that duty had been breached. Additionally, the Court was required to determine whether FOS had acted with procedural unfairness or bias in its investigation and determination of the complaint, and whether these actions, if proven, constituted a breach of administrative law principles.

Judge Simpson found that FOS, as an ombudsman service established to provide a dispute resolution mechanism, did not owe a common law duty of care to individual complainants. The Court reasoned that the statutory framework under which FOS operated did not contemplate or impose such a duty, and that to recognise one would undermine the integrity and independence of the ombudsman scheme. Furthermore, the Court found no evidence to support the applicant's claims of procedural unfairness or bias, concluding that FOS had acted within its powers and in accordance with its established procedures. The application was therefore dismissed.