Dhillon v The Canberra Sikh Association Inc

SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

Case Title:

Dhillon v The Canberra Sikh Association Inc

Citation: 

[2025] ACTSC 271

Hearing Date: 

13 June 2025

Decision Date: 

30 June 2025

Before:

Muller AJ

Decision: 

See [19]

Catchwords: 

CIVIL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application to order filing of statement of claim – where proceedings correctly commenced by originating application – convenience of treating as if started by originating claim – general importance of pleadings – significant factual dispute

Legislation Cited: 

Associations Incorporation Act 1991 (ACT), s 49

Court Procedures Rules2006 (ACT), rr 33(2), 34(2), 39(2), 50(2)

Cases Cited: 

Canberra Data Centres Pty Ltd v Vibe Constructions (ACT) Pty Ltd [2010] ACTSC 20

Millard v Collins [2021] ACTSC 216

Parties: 

Jiwan Dhillon ( Applicant)

The Canberra Sikh Association Inc ( Respondent)

Representation: 

Counsel

Jeffrey Levine ( Applicant)

Athol Opas ( Respondent)

Solicitors

Matrix Legal ( Applicant)

Signus Legal ( Respondent)

File Number:

SC 138 of 2025

MULLER AJ: 

Introduction

1․The applicant (Mr Dhillon) commenced this proceeding by way of an originating application lodged on 17 April 2025.

2․The respondent (the Association) is an incorporated association and registered charity in the ACT with some 800 members. According to its constitution the objects of the Association include the promotion in Australia of an understanding of the Sikh philosophy, religion and culture, and the fostering of a sense of community amongst Sikh people in the region.

3․Mr Dhillon is a member of the Association, and by his originating application he seeks a number of orders that are directed to governance issues, said to arise pursuant to the Associations Incorporation Act 1991 (ACT) (Associations Incorporation Act) and/or pursuant to the Association’s own constitution.

4․There were two applications in proceeding before the Court. The application lodged by Mr Dhillon on 11 June 2025 sought leave to file an amended originating application in the form annexed to his affidavit affirmed on the same day. The Association consented to Mr Dhillon’s application.

5․The contest before the Court was thus limited to the Association's application in proceeding lodged on 27 May 2025, requesting that Mr Dhillon be ordered to file a statement of claim pursuant to r 39(2)(d) of the Court Procedures Rules2006 (ACT) (the CPR). The court is empowered by that rule to order the plaintiff to file and serve a statement of claim, where it considers that proceedings either should have been started by originating claim or may more conveniently continue as if started by originating claim.

Kinds of originating process

6․The rules provide two vehicles for the commencement of a civil proceeding: either an originating application or an originating claim. The default position under the rules is that unless a territory law requires, or allows a proceeding to be started by originating application, then it should be started by originating claim: r 33(2) of the CPR. A relevant point of procedural difference between the two forms of proceeding is that where a proceeding is commenced by originating claim, a statement…