Kestel v Superannuation Complaints Tribunal

Dannielle Elizabeth Kestel sought a declaration that the Superannuation Complaints Tribunal had jurisdiction to hear a complaint she sought to lodge concerning a decision of Asgard Capital Management Limited, the trustee of a superannuation fund, in relation to the payment of a death benefit. The Tribunal had determined that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the complaint as it was lodged out of time. The critical issue for determination was whether the solicitor acting for Ms Kestel had authority to receive a letter from Asgard Capital Management Limited containing the trustee's decision and the period within which Ms Kestel must complain to the Tribunal. If the solicitor had such authority, then the Tribunal was correct to find that it lacked jurisdiction. The Court found that the solicitor did have the requisite authority. The reasoning was that the solicitor had communicated with Asgard Capital Management Limited that he was acting for Ms Kestel in relation to the superannuation matter. All subsequent correspondence was conducted between the solicitor and Asgard Capital Management Limited. The Court concluded that, by virtue of the doctrine of agency, the solicitor was authorised to receive the notice from Asgard Capital Management Limited and thereby Ms Kestel was deemed to have been given notice of the trustee's decision. Since the complaint was lodged out of time, the Tribunal was correct to find that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the complaint.

The Court dismissed the application and ordered each party to pay their own costs.