Gaynor v Attorney General of New South Wales

The appeal concerned a dispute between Ms Gaynor and the Attorney General of New South Wales. The core of the disagreement involved whether the Local Court of New South Wales possessed jurisdiction to hear a "diversity suit" where the alleged contravention of section 49ZS of the *Anti-Discrimination Act 1977* (NSW) involved publications on the internet. This matter was heard by Bell P, Basten, and Leeming JJA in the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine several significant legal issues. Firstly, it had to consider whether the jurisdictional threshold for an appeal, requiring the matter at issue to amount to or involve $100,000 or more, was satisfied. Secondly, the Court examined the constitutionality of Part 3A of the *Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013* (NSW), specifically whether, despite this Part, the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT) was invested with federal jurisdiction. Finally, the Court considered whether Part 3A entailed discrimination contrary to section 117 of the Commonwealth Constitution, and whether a complaint by a New South Wales resident against a Queensland resident, referred by the President of the Anti-Discrimination Board to NCAT, could be heard by the Local Court of New South Wales.

The Court's reasoning focused on the jurisdictional requirements for an appeal. It was held that the party seeking to appeal bore the onus of demonstrating that the jurisdictional threshold of $100,000 or more was met. As this threshold was not established, the Court found it unnecessary to delve into the broader constitutional questions concerning the validity of Part 3A of the *Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013* (NSW) or the jurisdiction of the Local Court in relation to diversity suits involving online publications. The Court concluded that the appeal could not proceed on the basis of the insufficient demonstration of the jurisdictional value.

Consequently, leave to appeal was refused.