Laws, R.J.S. v Australian Broadcasting Tribunal - [1988] FCA 409

JUDGMENT No. &.%....g.8...-

CATCHWORDS

BROADCASTING AND TELEVISION - r a d l o p r o g r a m s t a n d a r d s -

b r o a d c a s t of p r o g r a m s a l l e g e d t o be b r c a c h l n o f

s t a n d a r d s - c o m p l a i n t s A u t o t r a l i a n E r o a r i c a s t l n g

T r l h u n a l - i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f c o m p l a 1 n t . s - d e c l s l o n t o h o l d

l n q u l r y - w h e t h e r v a l l d l t y of c o m p l a l n t s p r e - l u d g e d -

r i g h t of h r o a d c a s t e r t o b e h e a r d n e f o r e d e c l s l o n made t o

h o l d l n q u l r y - w h e t h e r b r o a d c a s t e r e n t l t l e d t o n a t u r a l

~ u s t i c e b e f o r e i n q u i r y h e l d - w h e t h e r l ' r l b u n a l b l a s e d -

x h e t h e r d e c l s l o n t o h o l d l n q u l r y s h o u l d b e a_uac,hc-d

R I C I I A R D J O H N SINCLAIR LAWS v . AUSTRALIAN B R O A D C A S T I N G

. .__ - ~- . -.
TR 1 EUNAL
No. G 102 of 1 9 0 0

IN T!IC FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA )

- - -.
1

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY ) No. G 102 of 1988

-. - __ -
)

GENERAL DIVISION - _. )

BETWEEN: RICHARD JOHN SINCLAIR LAWS
Applicant

AND : AUSTRALIAN DROADCASTIKG -

TRIBUNAL -

Respondent

___- MINUTE OF ORDER

JUDGE MAKING ORDER : morllng J.
-

DATE Or ORDER : 5 August 1988

WHERE IlADE -- : Sydney
THE COURT ORDERS:

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Laws, R.J.S. v Australian Broadcasting Tribunal

Details

AGLC: Laws, R.J.S. v Australian Broadcasting Tribunal [1988] FCA 409
Case: [1988] FCA 409
Decision Date: 8 May 1988

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In this case, the applicant, Richard John Sinclair Laws, sought an order quashing decisions of the Australian Broadcasting Tribunal (ABT) relating to several programs broadcast in March 1987 and a declaration that the Tribunal be restrained from further investigating the matters. The legal issues the court had to decide were whether the Tribunal was obliged to observe the rules of natural justice when making the decision to hold an inquiry and whether the decision to hold the inquiry was unreasonable and an abuse of the Tribunal's power. The court found that the Tribunal was not obliged to observe the rules of natural justice when making the decision to hold an inquiry. However, it was concerned about the Tribunal's bias and ordered that the Tribunal not proceed with the inquiry while the Chairman, Vice-Chairman, or Mr Bailey were present as members of the Tribunal. The application was otherwise dismissed, and no order as to costs was made. The orders were not to be entered before 15 August 1988.

Orders