Ellis v Burswood Nominees Ltd Trading as Crown Resort
Case
•
[2019] FCCA 1819
•10 July 2019
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Ellis v Burswood Nominees Ltd Trading as Crown Resort [2019] FCCA 1819
[2019] FCCA 1819
10 July 2019
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Supreme Court of Western Australia, constituted by Judge Antoni Lucev, considered an application to summarily dismiss an originating application brought by Mr Ellis, a person with a disability, against Burswood Nominees Ltd, trading as Crown Resort. Mr Ellis alleged that he was assaulted by a security guard employed by Crown Resort after he complained about the use of disability access toilets by an able-bodied person. Mr Ellis also alleged that the security guard assaulted an able-bodied person who intervened in the incident.
The central legal issues before the Court were whether Mr Ellis's originating application had no reasonable prospect of success, thereby warranting summary dismissal. This involved determining whether the Court had the power to grant the remedies sought by Mr Ellis, which included orders for the prosecution of the alleged assaults and the revocation of security guard licences. The Court also considered the admissibility of CCTV footage, specifically whether it was unfairly prejudicial.
Judge Lucev reasoned that the Court lacked the jurisdiction to make orders for the prosecution of criminal offences, as this power rests with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Furthermore, the Court determined that it did not have the statutory authority to revoke security guard licences, which is a function of the relevant licensing authority. Consequently, the Court found that the remedies sought by Mr Ellis were beyond its power to grant, meaning his originating application had no reasonable prospect of success.
Accordingly, the Court ordered the summary dismissal of Mr Ellis's originating application.
The central legal issues before the Court were whether Mr Ellis's originating application had no reasonable prospect of success, thereby warranting summary dismissal. This involved determining whether the Court had the power to grant the remedies sought by Mr Ellis, which included orders for the prosecution of the alleged assaults and the revocation of security guard licences. The Court also considered the admissibility of CCTV footage, specifically whether it was unfairly prejudicial.
Judge Lucev reasoned that the Court lacked the jurisdiction to make orders for the prosecution of criminal offences, as this power rests with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Furthermore, the Court determined that it did not have the statutory authority to revoke security guard licences, which is a function of the relevant licensing authority. Consequently, the Court found that the remedies sought by Mr Ellis were beyond its power to grant, meaning his originating application had no reasonable prospect of success.
Accordingly, the Court ordered the summary dismissal of Mr Ellis's originating application.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Negligence & Tort
-
Administrative Law
-
Civil Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Summary Judgment
-
Standing
-
Remedies
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Abuse of Process
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union v Andrade Holdings Pty Ltd [2021] FCCA 213
Cases Citing This Decision
1
Cases Cited
41
Statutory Material Cited
14
Olsen v Wellard Feeds Pty Ltd
[2007] FMCA 1885
Ainsworth v Burden
[2005] NSWCA 174
Spencer v Commonwealth of Australia
[2010] HCA 28