Chattha v Malik t/as Malik Cabs

In the case of Chattha v Malik t/as Malik Cabs, the applicant, Chattha, challenged a decision made by an Arbitrator in a dispute over taxi licenses between him and Malik, trading as Malik Cabs. The Arbitrator had issued a Certificate of Determination in which the first and second respondents were awarded taxi licenses, while the third respondent was not. Chattha argued that the Arbitrator had erred in his consideration of medical evidence and that procedural fairness had been breached.

The primary legal issues for the court to address were whether the Arbitrator made an alleged factual error in dealing with the medical evidence and whether the principle of procedural fairness, as outlined in Stead v State Government Insurance Commission and Seltsam Pty Limited v Ghaleb, was breached in the proceedings. Additionally, the court had to consider the applicability of the rule in Browne v Dunn and the admissibility of hearsay evidence under Onesteel Reinforcing Pty Ltd v Sutton.

The court found that the Arbitrator had indeed erred in his consideration of the medical evidence, which was a significant factor in the determination of the dispute. The court also determined that procedural fairness was not properly observed, leading to a breach of natural justice. Consequently, the court revoked the Certificate of Determination concerning the awards to the first and second respondents and remitted the matter for re-determination by another Arbitrator. The award to the third respondent was confirmed, as it was not subject to the same errors.