Jamal v Commissioner of Police (NSW)

Jamal sought leave to appeal from a decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Court of Appeal) which had refused his application for judicial review of decisions made by the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT). The dispute concerned NCAT's refusal to grant an adjournment, its refusal to grant leave to proceed with a complaint of discrimination, and alleged procedural unfairness or other errors of law in its proceedings.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether there was an arguable case that NCAT had erred in law. This involved considering whether the Tribunal was properly constituted by a qualified member, whether its application engaged a "substantive Division function," whether there was bias, and whether its reasons for decision were adequate. Further issues included whether challenges to NCAT's fact-finding were available on judicial review, whether a failure to supply written reasons within a specified time rendered a decision invalid, and whether errors in naming the correct respondent or recording decisions in the Tribunal's records constituted jurisdictional error.

Basten and Payne JJA refused leave to appeal, finding that the applicant had not demonstrated an arguable case of procedural unfairness or other error of law. The Court concluded that the grounds of appeal lacked merit, and therefore, leave to appeal was refused. The applicant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs of the application for leave to appeal.