Crewdson v Niland

[2002] NSWADTAP 5

Appeal Panel

CITATION:	Crewdson -v- Niland & Ors (EOD) [2002] NSWADTAP 5
PARTIES:	APPLICANT Gerard Michael Crewdson FIRST RESPONDENT Carmel Niland SECOND RESPONDENT Helia Gapper THIRD RESPONDENT Raoul Salpeter FOURTH RESPONDENT Teresa Anderson
FILE NUMBER:	019022; 019028
HEARING DATES:	17/08/2001
SUBMISSIONS CLOSED:	10/15/2001
DATE OF DECISION:	03/04/2002
DECISION UNDER APPEAL:	Dismissal of complaint pursuant to s 111 (1) of the Anti Discrimination Act 1977
BEFORE:	Latham M - DCJ (Deputy President); Bitel D - Judicial Member; Antonios Z - Member
CATCHWORDS:	Dismissal of complaint - frivolous, vexatious, misconceived or lacking in substance
MATTER FOR DECISION:	Principal matter
FILE NUMBER UNDER APPEAL:	011015
DATE OF DECISION UNDER APPEAL:	06/29/2001
LEGISLATION CITED:	Anti-Discrimination Act 1977
CASES CITED:	Crewdson v President, Anti Discrimination Board of NSW [2000] NSWADT 60 House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499 Norbis v Norbis (1986) 161 CLR 513 Casey v Entrad Corporation Ltd [92-179] 17 November 1986 Schulz v Medical Board of Queensland [2001] AATA 468 Attorney-General v Wentworth (1988) 14 NSWLR 481 Mattinson v Multiplo Incubators Pty Ltd [1977] 1 NSWLR 368 Gas & Fuel Corp (Vic) v Comptroller of Stamps [1964] VR 617 Rose v Secretary, Department of Social Security (1990) 92 ALR 521 Fairey v Fairey (No 2) [2000] NSWCA 173
REPRESENTATION:	APPELLANT In person FIRST RESPONDENT A Moses, barrister SECOND RESPONDENT A Moses, barrister THIRD RESPONDENT A Moses, barrister FOURTH RESPONDENT No Appearance
ORDERS:	Appeal dismissed.

1 The Appellant by two Notices of Appeal appeals against three decisions made by the Tribunal below in the course of proceedings brought by him against the Respondents, alleging victimisation under s 50 of the Anti Discrimination Act (the AD Act). The first two of those decisions were refusals to grant the Appellant an adjournment of his application for interim orders and an adjournment of the Respondents’ application for dismissal of the complaint, when that hearing commenced on 1 May, and again on 17 May, prior to the second hearing date of 23 May 2001. The third of those decisions was the dismissal of the complaint for want of prosecution under s 111(1) of the AD Act.

2 The history of these proceedings is set out comprehensively at paras 3 to 7 of the Tribunal’s decision of 29 June 2001. Those paras incorporate paras 5 to 20 and 58 and 59 of a decision of the Tribunal of 16 May 2000 ; see Crewdson v President, Anti Discrimination Board of NSW [2000] NSWADT 60. No issue has been taken with that account and it is adopted by the Panel for the purposes of this appeal. It is sufficient to observe that the First and Second Respondents were parties to a Deed of Release with the Appellant, as part of a settlement of two cases pending before the Equal Opportunity Tribunal in October 1998. The Third and Fourth Respondents were the solicitor and barrister then acting on behalf of the Department of Community Services and the Central Sydney Area Health Service, the respondents in those pending proceedings.…